Get Forum Topic (Optional)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds: returns 5 posts by default, an optional post_limit, and that the tool is optional (requires external server). It could mention error behavior if server is unavailable, but overall adds useful context beyond annotations.

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 paragraph but well-structured with bold markers for emphasis. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. There is some redundancy (e.g., 'OPTIONAL FEATURE' repeated), but no filler sentences. Could be slightly more concise with bullet points, but overall efficient.

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?

The tool has 2 parameters, rich annotations, and no output schema. The description explains the optional nature, critical use case, default behavior, and provides an example. However, it does not describe the return format or error handling, which would be helpful given no output schema. Still, it is sufficiently complete for an agent.

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 coverage is 100%, with both parameters described. The description adds meaning: for topicId, gives an example of extraction from a URL; for post_limit, states default is 5, range 1-20, and advises using higher values only when needed. This enriches the schema information.

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?

Clearly states 'Get detailed information about a specific Discourse forum topic, including posts and replies.' This is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like getDiscourseLatestTopics and searchDiscourseForum by focusing on a single topic. Also includes a critical use case for B3TR proposals.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use: requires Discourse MCP server (optional), and when not available suggests providing direct URL. Also advises on post_limit: 'Use higher values only when full discussion context is specifically needed.' Includes example of extracting topicId from a URL, which is helpful context.

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