search_forum_topic

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that the operation is read-only, whether results are paginated, permission requirements, or how results are ordered, leaving key behavioral traits unspecified.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, and the core scope is front-loaded. It is appropriately brief for a simple search tool, though the brevity borders on under-specification given the missing parameter details.

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?

For a 5-parameter search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is far too thin. It omits parameter meanings and behavioral context that an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly, making it incomplete for the tool's complexity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and there are 5 parameters. The description only loosely hints at 'query' and 'topic_id' through 'message text' and 'forum topic'; parameters like limit, account, and the chat format receive no explanation, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 states a specific verb ('Search') and a scoped resource ('message text inside one forum topic'), which distinguishes it from search_global. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling search_chat, which likely searches across a whole chat, leaving some ambiguity about when to prefer this tool.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus search_chat or search_global, no prerequisites, and no mention of when not to use it. Usage is only implicitly suggested by the scope phrase 'inside one forum topic'.

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