list_topics

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

With no annotations, the description discloses meaningful behaviors: it is a 'lofi version' returning a specific lightweight set of fields, it uses a '(!)' prefix convention for important topics, and it returns a 'rate_limited' payload with retry_after_seconds and retry_at_utc instead of erroring on rate limits. It could mention pagination or ordering, but the provided detail is useful.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core listing action and output fields appear first, followed by the rate-limit exception. The phrase 'lofi version' is slightly ambiguous but does not distract from the main purpose.

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 a simple one-parameter tool, the description covers the core semantic (list topics), the return fields, and the only exceptional behavior (rate limiting). It does not mention pagination or ordering, but nothing in the provided schema or complexity suggests those are required for correct basic invocations.

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 sole parameter forum_id is 100% covered by its schema description ('4PDA forum ID.'). The description adds some context by specifying the tool lists topics within that forum, but that is already implied, so there is no significant extra semantic value 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 clearly states a specific verb ('List'), resource ('topics in a 4PDA forum'), and the returned fields (id, title, reply count, is_important). It does not explicitly name siblings list_forums or list_posts, but the distinction is evident from the resource term itself.

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 implies this is the tool for listing topics for a given forum_id, and gives conditional guidance for rate-limit handling ('wait that long before calling again'). However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over sister tools like list_forums or list_posts.

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