show_forum_topic

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 repeats the show/retrieve intent; it does not mention whether output includes replies, metadata, pagination, or any access requirements.

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 only four words and contains no fluff, but it is under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness. It adds almost no value beyond the tool name.

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 one-parameter read tool this could still be minimally workable, but with no output schema and no parameter description the agent cannot reliably know what input to pass or what result to expect.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage and the tool description adds nothing about topic_ref beyond implying it identifies a forum topic. The agent is not told the expected format (ID, slug) or how to obtain the reference.

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 states a clear verb and resource: show a specific forum topic thread. It distinguishes the tool from sibling list/show tools by resource type (forum vs kernel, dataset, competition), though 'show' is generic and the scope of 'thread' is not detailed.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of list_forum_topics or the other show_*_topic tools. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing instructions.

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