get_new_topics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing key behaviors: it describes the sorting order ('newest first'), notes that topics may have fewer replies, explains pagination behavior, and details the return structure. However, it doesn't mention potential rate limits or authentication requirements, which could be relevant for a forum API.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidelines, parameter details, return values, and a helpful tip. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 the tool's moderate complexity (1 parameter, read-only operation), no annotations, and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete: it covers purpose, usage, parameter semantics, return values, and behavioral context, leaving no significant gaps for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the pagination logic ('0-indexed', 'Use page=1 to get more topics') and providing context about what 'page' represents in this specific tool, elevating it above the baseline.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('fetch', 'returns') and resources ('latest/newest topics from USCardForum'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_hot_topics or get_top_topics by emphasizing recency and freshness rather than popularity or ranking.

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 provides explicit usage scenarios ('Find newly posted deals', 'See fresh questions', 'Discover emerging discussions') and includes a tip about high view counts, offering clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_forum or get_hot_topics for different types of content discovery.

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