List the achievement badges you have unlocked as a founder on TrendIdea and the milestones behind them. Use it to see progress and which milestones are still open. Read-only and free; takes no parameters and scopes to your own account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes | The tool result rendered as human and AI readable text or markdown. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description says 'Read-only and free', which matches the annotation readOnlyHint: true. It goes beyond annotations by clarifying zero cost ('free') and automatic user scoping. There is no contradiction with 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?
Two concise sentences with maximum signal: first states purpose, second states when to use and constraints. No filler words.
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 zero parameters, a full coverage schema, annotations, and an output schema, the description fully covers what a zero-param read-only tool needs to enable correct invocation. It is complete.
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 (100% coverage) and the description confirms it 'takes no parameters', which adds no ambiguity. No further param info 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 explicitly lists the verb 'list', the resource 'achievement badges', and the scope 'as a founder on TrendIdea'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_portfolio' or 'get_founder_dna' by focusing specifically on achievements and milestones.
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 states when to use it: 'to see progress and which milestones are still open'. It also clarifies that it 'takes no parameters and scopes to your own account', implying no filtering is needed. However, it does not explicitly mention when NOT to use it or name alternative tools for different scopes.
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 targets a distinct function or data aspect, from idea CRUD to simulations, content generation, and team management. Despite the large number, descriptions clearly differentiate purposes, e.g., 'get_idea_summary' vs. 'get_idea_agents' vs. 'get_idea_evolution'. No two tools appear to do the same thing.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., 'create_idea', 'get_competitive_density', 'toggle_favorite'). No mixing of conventions like camelCase or abbreviations. The pattern is uniform and predictable.
63 tools is far beyond the typical well-scoped range of 3-15. While the platform's broad scope (idea validation, B2B, team, simulations) justifies many, the sheer volume can overwhelm an agent. A more curated subset or grouping would improve coherence.
The tool set covers the full startup idea lifecycle: creation, validation, retrieval of various analyses, updates, deletion, sharing, simulations, B2B lead generation, team collaboration, and market intelligence. No obvious gaps exist for the stated domain.
