List the products gaining the most community momentum in a time window. Use this for "what's new/hot/trending" questions. Ranked by AppBoard's Product Buzz Score, which weights recent upvotes, comments, follows and saves by recency.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | how many products to return (1-50, default 10) | |
| period | No | time window: today, yesterday, week, month or all (default week) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the ranking mechanism (Product Buzz Score weighting recent upvotes, comments, follows, saves by recency), giving transparency into behavior without exposing side effects.
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 concise, two sentences, and front-loaded with the main action. It efficiently conveys purpose, usage, and ranking logic without unnecessary 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 there is no output schema, the description adequately communicates what the tool returns (ranked products). It could mention output format, but for a simple list tool, the context is sufficient.
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 schema already covers both parameters with clear descriptions (limit as count, period as time window). The description doesn't add extra meaning beyond what's in the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 lists products gaining community momentum. It is distinct from sibling tools like appboard_find_products or appboard_product_details, which focus on searching or retrieving details.
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?
It explicitly says to use this for 'what's new/hot/trending' questions, providing clear when-to-use guidance. Although it doesn't mention when not to use it, the explicit instruction is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.