get_forum_topics_by_id

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic get operation—no mention of limits, not-found behavior, or ordering. It simply restates the purpose without disclosing additional traits.

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 a single concise sentence with no superfluous words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, though it sacrifices necessary context for brevity.

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?

While an output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the two required parameters are completely undocumented, and there's no guidance on usage limits or relationship to sibling tools. For a read-mostly tool, this level of description is insufficient given the 0% parameter coverage.

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 0% and the description does not explain what 'chat' represents (e.g., forum identifier) or how topic_ids should be structured. The mention of 'by their id' is too vague to compensate for the complete lack of parameter documentation.

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 uses a specific verb 'get' with a clear resource 'forum topics by id', distinguishing it from sibling 'get_forum_topics' which likely retrieves all topics. The Russian text is unambiguous about targeting specific topics by their identifiers.

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 usage when specific topic IDs are known, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over get_forum_topics or mention any exclusions. No alternative tools are referenced.

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