get_trending_topics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions the data source (GDELT) but omits details on rate limits, data freshness, or whether the operation is read-only. The parameter descriptions are present but incomplete on 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 with a one-line purpose and a structured Args section. No unnecessary content; each sentence serves a purpose.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basics. However, it omits details about the return format or any pagination, which could be expected for a trending topics tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fills the gap by listing allowed values for timespan (1h, 4h, 1d, 3d, 7d) and tone_filter (positive, negative, neutral, empty). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's defaults.

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 retrieves current trending topics worldwide via GDELT. The verb 'Ermittelt' (determines) and resource 'aktuelle Trending-Themen weltweit' are specific. While it distinguishes from sibling tools like get_hackernews_trending, it does not explicitly differentiate, leaving some ambiguity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_hackernews_top or search_global_news. It only describes functionality without context for selection.

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