get_overviewGet a global overview of PainSpotter: all domain categories (with theme count, opportunity count and 30-day mentions) plus a snapshot of currently trending themes. A good first step to map the landscape before drilling in with the other tools. (Free tool)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by noting it's a 'snapshot' of trending themes (implying point-in-time data) and a 'global overview' (implying full scope, no filtering). It also mentions 'Free tool,' which is a cost-related behavioral trait not covered by 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 two sentences plus a parenthetical tag, front-loaded with the primary purpose and then adding a usage suggestion and cost note. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.
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?
Despite having no parameters and a rich output schema, the description sufficiently explains what data is included, how it should be used as a first step, and clarifies its free cost. It is complete for a simple overview tool with comprehensive annotations.
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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description compensates by describing the richness of the output, which is more relevant than parameter details here. Baseline of 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool.
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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Get a global overview') and resource ('PainSpotter'), listing concrete deliverables: all domain categories with theme count, opportunity count, 30-day mentions, and trending themes. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by positioning itself as a broad overview before 'drilling in' with the others.
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 explicitly positions this tool as 'a good first step' and contrasts it with drilling in using other tools, providing clear when-to-use guidance. It doesn't name specific alternatives but the sibling context and general overview framing make the intended usage clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: get_overview provides a landscape map, get_theme dives into a specific theme, list_trending_themes shows hot themes, get_opportunity gives full detail on an opportunity, and query_opportunities enables filtered search. No overlap.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (get_overview, get_theme, list_trending_themes, get_opportunity, query_opportunities), making them predictable and easy to understand.
With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for its domain of market signal analysis. Each tool serves a clear function without redundancy or unnecessary complexity.
The tool set covers the full workflow: overview, theme exploration, trending themes, detailed opportunity views, and searchable filtering. All key operations for the domain are present with no obvious gaps.