create_forum_discussion

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

The description discloses the default dry_run mode, explains that it validates permissions only, and instructs setting dry_run=False to actually post. It also mentions the return format (validated status, discussionid if posted) and that HTML is allowed in the message, providing rich behavioral context beyond the bare create action.

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 well-structured with a brief summary, a clear note about dry_run, and a compact Args list. Every sentence serves a purpose and there is no fluff, making it both informative and concise.

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 create operation with 4 parameters and no annotations, this description covers the essential context: what the tool does, how to use it, the default dry-run behavior, and what is returned. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without needing additional documentation.

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?

Although the input schema has no descriptions, the tool description fills this gap completely by explaining each parameter: forum_id, subject, message, and dry_run. It adds valuable guidance like 'use list_forums to get it' and 'HTML allowed', going far beyond the schema's minimal titles.

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 clearly states 'Create a new discussion (tema) in a forum' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like reply_forum_post and list_forum_discussions by explicitly targeting new discussion creation.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use this tool (creating a new discussion) and even directs users to list_forums for obtaining forum_id. However, it does not explicitly mention that reply_forum_post should be used for replies, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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