tapatalk_get_topics

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates safety. The description adds value by disclosing the return fields (topic IDs, titles, authors, reply counts, previews), which is useful behavior context beyond the annotation. It does not overpromise or contradict the annotation.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Every word contributes: it states the action, scope, and return contents, making it highly efficient.

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 schema covers parameters and annotations cover read-only safety, the description completes the picture by describing the output shape (returned fields). It does not mention pagination or mode filtering, but those are already explained in the schema and are not essential to the tool's core purpose.

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 input schema already documents all four parameters completely (forum_id, page, per_page, mode) with descriptions, giving 100% coverage. The tool description does not add any extra parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('topics in a specific forum'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like tapatalk_get_latest_topics or tapatalk_search_topics. It also specifies the scope (specific forum) and what is returned.

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 phrase 'in a specific forum' provides clear context for when to use this tool: when the caller knows the target forum ID, as opposed to the latest/unread/participated topic tools. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the intended usage is evident from the description and sibling names.

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