create_discussion_topic

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only clarifies that the topic is non-announcement, but does not mention side effects, the meaning of the 'published' default, required permissions, or potential impacts. This is a significant gap for a write operation.

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 and is front-loaded with the primary action. However, it is under-specified: there is no wasted text, but the brevity comes at the cost of missing operational details, so it is not appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 four parameters, zero schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. Although an output schema exists, the description does not clarify return behavior, parameter semantics, or usage prerequisites, leaving the agent underprepared.

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 any of the parameters (title, message, published, course_identifier). The agent is left to infer meaning solely from parameter names, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 and resource: 'Create a new (non-announcement) discussion topic.' It clearly distinguishes from the sibling create_announcement by explicitly excluding announcements, making it easy for an agent to select this over related creation tools.

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 phrase 'non-announcement' implicitly signals that this tool is for regular discussion topics, not announcements. However, it does not state when to use it over other discussion-related tools (e.g., post_discussion_entry) or provide any conditional guidance. The usage context is clear but not explicit.

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