tapatalk_get_unread_topics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds 'Requires authentication' and 'logged-in user' scope, which are behavioral traits beyond the annotation. This provides useful context about the tool's requirements and operation without contradicting the read-only hint.

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 precise, front-loaded sentences: the first states the action and resource, the second states the authentication requirement. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple listing tool with only two optional pagination parameters and a read-only annotation, the description fully covers the core purpose and auth prerequisite. The schema handles pagination details, and the sibling differentiation is sufficient, making the description complete for an agent's needs.

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 descriptions cover both parameters (page and per_page) with defaults and constraints, so the description adds no additional parameter-level meaning. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'unread topics' for the logged-in user, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tapatalk_get_topics or tapatalk_get_latest_topics. It also adds the authentication prerequisite, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 description states the context as 'for the logged-in user' and mentions authentication, which implies when the tool should be used. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state exclusions, but the scope is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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