list_forums

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It goes beyond a simple 'list' by explaining the rate-limit behavior: a 'rate_limited' payload with retry_after_seconds and retry_at_utc is returned instead of an error, telling the agent exactly what to expect and how long to wait.

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 efficient and front-loaded. The first paragraph states the core behavior, including the optional parameter's impact, and the second paragraph adds the rate-limit detail. No unnecessary words or filler.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description explains what the function returns, how the parameter changes behavior, and how rate limiting is handled. It avoids describing response field names, which could be considered a minor gap without an output schema, but nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameter is already documented in the input schema. However, the description adds meaning by clarifying that omitting forum_id returns top-level categories (the forum tree roots) and that IDs are 4PDA forum IDs. This is useful context beyond the schema's terse 'Forum ID. Omit to list top-level categories.'

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 the tool lists 4PDA forum categories/subforums, a specific verb and resource, and explains the two modes (with and without forum_id). This separates it from the sibling tools list_topics and list_posts, which deal with topics and posts rather than forum structure.

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 explains what the tool returns in both modes but does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it. The mention of 'a summary of its topics' implies list_topics might be used for full topic listings, but that guidance is left to inference rather than stated explicitly.

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