list_topics

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention anything about read-only nature, permissions, or output behavior. The cryptic text offers no transparency.

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?

While very short, the description is not clear. It uses a cryptic format that confuses rather than clarifies. Conciseness is good only when it retains clarity, which is not the case here.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a simple tool, the description fails to provide essential context. It doesn't explain what the tool lists, what it returns, or any usage notes. Completely insufficient.

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 is empty (0 parameters), so schema description coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no extra meaning, but there is nothing to add. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as no additional parameter context is needed.

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 'read / control_plane / DESCRIBE' is cryptic and does not explicitly state that this tool lists topics. The name 'list_topics' hints at the purpose, but the description adds little clarity and could be considered a tautology.

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 on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like describe_topic or create_topic. The description provides no context for appropriate usage.

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