list_topics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries significant load by disclosing pagination limits (fixed 20 per page), return structure (topics[], has_more, total), and detailed object fields (stats breakdown). Missing safety hints (read-only implication not stated).

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?

Information-dense Chinese description effectively packs pagination rules, return schema, and object structure into one sentence. No redundant text, though slightly dense.

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?

Despite lack of output schema, description comprehensively documents the response structure and pagination behavior adequate for a simple list operation. Complete for its complexity level.

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 has 100% coverage for the single 'page' parameter. Description adds crucial context by specifying the page size (20 items), which is necessary for proper pagination logic, exceeding baseline expectations for fully documented schemas.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves a list of knowledge bases (topics) with specific pagination (20 items per page). Identifies the resource accurately, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling list operations like list_topic_notes.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this versus siblings (e.g., list_topic_notes) or prerequisites. Usage must be inferred from the resource name and described return values.

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