sns_list_topics

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It accurately indicates a read-only listing operation, but it does not disclose return format, pagination, or any LocalStack-specific quirks. For such a simple operation, the disclosure is adequate but minimal, so a mid-range score is appropriate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded and concise. It contains no filler or redundant information, earning a top score.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It clearly states the operation and scope, though it omits the exact return value (e.g., list of topic ARNs), which is a minor gap for a list operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is complete (100% coverage). The description does not need to add parameter information since there are none, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'List all SNS topics in LocalStack' uses a specific verb+resource construction, clearly stating the operation and scope. It is immediately distinct from sibling SNS tools like sns_create_topic and sns_delete_topic, which are write operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The purpose implies when to use it: whenever you need to enumerate SNS topics. There are no alternative listing tools for SNS topics among siblings, so no exclusions are necessary. However, the description does not explicitly state 'use this when you need to view topics' or mention any alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.