donanimhaber_forum_hot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does reasonably well: it discloses the limit range (1..50), the returned fields (id, title, time ago, forum, online users, URL), and the token-gated search constraint. It omits any note on rate limits, caching, or freshness semantics for 'right now'.

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 text is short and front-loaded with the core purpose, then the limit bound, then the return fields, then the search caveat. The line breaks are slightly awkward but no sentence is wasted.

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 single-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, bound, return shape, and the notable search limitation. Nothing essential to correct invocation is missing, though a one-line contrast with donanimhaber_latest would close the remaining gap.

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 0% and the schema only shows a default of 10, so the description's 'limit 1..50' adds real constraint information the schema lacks. It does not explain what happens if limit is omitted beyond the default, but the key bound is covered.

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 specific verb and resource: 'hottest topics on the DonanımHaber forum right now', with the domain (forum.donanimhaber.com popular topics) spelled out. It is clearly distinct from siblings like donanimhaber_latest and donanimhaber_search_news, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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 usefully rules out keyword search ('the forum's own search is token-gated, so there is no keyword search for the forum'), which steers an agent away from a dead end. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to pick this over donanimhaber_latest or donanimhaber_section, leaving the hot-vs-latest choice to inference.

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