list_forum_topics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that topics are listed and gives a scope qualifier; it does not disclose read-only status, authentication requirements, default sorting behavior, pagination, or response format. The scope qualifier adds a little context, but most behavior is left unspecified.

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 sentence is short and free of filler, stating the core action and scope in nine words. It is efficient, though too sparse to provide a complete picture; as simple prose it is well-constructed but not detailed enough to be a full specification.

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 five undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this single-sentence description is far from sufficient. An agent cannot infer valid sort values, category semantics, pagination defaults, or what the returned topic list looks like, making the tool risky to invoke.

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?

All five parameters have empty schema descriptions (0% coverage), and the description names none of them. It does not explain what 'forum', 'search', 'sort_by', 'category', or 'page_size' mean, nor how they affect results, so the agent has no semantic grounding for any parameter.

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 action ('List topics') and the scope ('in a forum or global search'), making the resource and purpose understandable. It distinguishes this from sibling tools that list datasets, models, or kernels, though it does not explicitly contrast with list_forums or show_forum_topic.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling 'list_*_topics' tools or 'show_forum_topic'. The phrase 'or global search' hints at a broader use case, but no conditions, exclusions, or alternative tool names are provided.

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