trustmrr_marketplace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It states that revenue figures are verified and describes the output structure (25+25 items). However, it does not disclose update frequency, caching behavior, or any limitations (e.g., rate limits). For a tool with no annotations, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and include relevant details (counts, ranking methodology, verification). No extraneous information.

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 no-parameter tool without an output schema, the description provides a clear picture of what is returned. However, it lacks information about whether the snapshot is real-time or cached, and if pagination or filtering is possible. Still, given the simplicity, it is reasonably complete.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is effectively 100%. The description adds no param info, which is acceptable; baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 it gets a 'TrustMRR marketplace snapshot' and specifies the exact content: the 25 most recently listed startups and the 25 best deals ranked by a recency-aware deal score. This is distinct from sibling tools like trustmrr_startup (single startup) and trustmrr_startups (likely a different list).

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 implies the tool is for obtaining a curated marketplace overview, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this over other trustmrr tools, exclude certain scenarios, or mention alternatives. Usage context is implied but not fully specified.

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