List Topics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat safety. It adds value by noting the return values, but does not disclose pagination behavior or other traits beyond what is in the schema.

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?

Two concise sentences: first sentence states purpose, second adds return information. No redundant or unnecessary text. Front-loaded for quick understanding.

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 simplicity of the tool (list with pagination), schema coverage is full, annotations cover safety, and an output schema exists. The description provides the core purpose and return values, which is adequate for an agent to use correctly. Missing explicit mention of pagination is compensated by the schema.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; baseline score is appropriate.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'topic groupings for a Peec AI project', and specifies the return value (IDs and names). This sufficiently distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_projects or list_topic_suggestions.

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 use for listing topic groupings, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_topic_suggestions. No exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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