Browse WWDC Topics

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, and the description usefully adds that the data is bundled and requires no network. However, it says nothing about result freshness, pagination beyond the schema's limit, or ordering, so it adds only one genuine behavioral detail.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the default (no-topicId) behavior before the alternate mode. Every clause carries information; no filler or repetition.

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?

With no output schema, the description helpfully sketches the return shape (ID, link, session count) and the session-listing mode. Only minor gaps remain, such as ordering or how sessions are shaped when topicId is supplied.

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 description coverage is 100%, including the full topicId enum list and defaults for limit and includeVideos, so the schema carries the burden. The description only restates year filtering and limit capping, adding no meaning beyond the schema.

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 names a concrete resource (WWDC topics) and spells out the two operating modes: listing all topics with ID/link/session count, or drilling into one topic's sessions. It is clear enough to distinguish from siblings like list_wwdc_videos, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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 implicitly explains the mode switch (pass topicId to get sessions instead of topics), but gives no guidance on when to choose this over list_wwdc_videos, search_wwdc_content, or list_wwdc_years, all of which overlap with topic browsing.

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