roblox_rankings

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 mentions it returns a 'public Roblox game shelf' but does not disclose output structure, pagination, or any side effects. For a simple read-only listing, this is minimal; more detail on what the shelf contains would improve transparency.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes essential parameter constraints. No redundant phrasing or filler.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter, but there is no output schema. The description does not explain the return format (e.g., list of games, fields, ranking order). While the 'shelf' hint gives some idea, more specificity would help an agent interpret results correctly.

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% and the schema description already lists the allowed sort_id values identically. The description repeats these values without adding new semantics, so it provides no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'Roblox game rankings', and specifies it returns a shelf of public games. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like roblox_search (search) and roblox_game (specific game) without 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 lists allowed sort_id values, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like roblox_search or roblox_game. Usage context is implied by the name and purpose, but not formally contrasted with siblings.

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