fomo_get_clan_leaderboard

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only hints that results vary by window. It does not state return format, default window, ordering, pagination, or whether this is a read-only call, though the 'get' verb in the tool name implies safety.

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 extremely terse and front-loaded, with no wasted words. However, it is a noun phrase rather than a structured sentence, and the brevity contributes to under-specification rather than efficient clarity.

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 two-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter documentation, this description is inadequate. An agent cannot determine valid window values, the effect of limit, defaults, or how this differs in usage from related leaderboard tools.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. 'By window' weakly implies the window parameter controls the leaderboard period, but no values or formats are provided and the limit parameter is not mentioned at all.

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 phrase 'Clan leaderboard by window' identifies a specific resource (clan leaderboard) and a distinguishing dimension (window), which separates it from siblings like fomo_get_leaderboard and fomo_get_clan. It lacks an explicit verb and does not define what 'window' means, so it is not as complete as a full sentence.

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?

No guidance is given on when to call this tool versus related clan/leaderboard tools such as fomo_get_leaderboard, fomo_get_clan, or fomo_search_clans. The context is implied by the name only.

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