get_top_trends

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: the feed is sourced from Google Trends RSS, is bounded, and may include related news where available. No contradiction with the readOnlyHint.

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 sentences deliver the core behavior and routing guidance without repetition or filler. The key scoping statement is front-loaded.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with all parameters documented and an output schema present, the description is complete: it states source, scope, bounded behavior, related news inclusion, and the sibling for ranked trends. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already fully documented with defaults, types, and limits. The description adds only light context (current top or daily trends) that maps to the type parameter, but it does not meaningfully extend the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: it Returns a bounded current topic discovery feed from Google Trends RSS. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get_ranked_trends, so an agent can tell which trend tool to call.

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 tool for current top or daily trends and directs the agent to get_ranked_trends when explicit ranking by growth or volume matters. That is clear selection guidance with a named alternative.

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