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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says nothing about whether the operation is read-only, what side effects exist, rate limits, or return format. The only information is billing, which does not help the agent understand behavior.

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 short but misallocates its few words to billing details ('Billing per call: 1 Credits...') instead of tool purpose or usage. It is not front-loaded with core functionality; it leads with cost, which is not the primary selection criterion.

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?

With no output schema and only two parameters, the description should at least state what results are returned (e.g., trending topics, format, pagination). It provides none of that, leaving agents without enough information to correctly interpret the tool's behavior. The billing note does not compensate.

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 already documents both parameters fully (count, location_id) with descriptions and examples, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the score stays at the baseline.

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 says 'Trends Group: Explore.' but never specifies the verb or resource (e.g., 'get trending topics'). It is nearly a tautology of the title 'Trends' and provides no differentiation from the many sibling tools. An agent cannot infer what this tool actually does.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. The description only mentions billing per call, which is irrelevant to selection. No context about what scenarios warrant calling this tool.

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