Topic Search

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, which already cover safety and idempotency. The description adds that it returns 'id, author, time, and excerpt', providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it omits details on result ordering or pagination.

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 one sentence, front-loading the verb and resource, and contains no superfluous information. It is highly 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?

Given no output schema and simple parameters, the description covers basic functionality but lacks details on pagination (e.g., offset) and result sorting, which are important for a search tool, especially with a 'limit' parameter.

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 documentation coverage is 100%, with both parameters described. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema already provides for 'keyword' and 'limit'. Baseline score of 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 clearly states 'Search community topics/posts by keyword', specifying the verb (search) and resource (community topics/posts). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'topic', 'topic_detail', and 'topic_create'.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The tool name and description imply it is for keyword-based searching of topics/posts, but there is no mention of alternatives or exclusion criteria.

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