twitch_streams

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does well by stating the ranking basis, the returned fields, and that the data is public and sourced from Twitch's GraphQL API. It stops short of mentioning pagination, rate limits, or invalid-category behavior, so not a 5.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action and result shape. It has only slight redundancy between 'top live streams' and 'top currently-live streams', but no meaningful fluff.

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 two-parameter read-only tool, the description provides sufficient context: the input scenario, output fields, ranking order, and data source. It lacks exact response-shape or edge-case details, but these are not critical for basic invocation.

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 already provides 100% coverage: 'game' includes slug-format guidance, and 'limit' includes its default and maximum. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb/resource—'Get the top live streams for a Twitch game/category'—and enumerates the returned fields. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like twitch_top_games (top games) and twitch_search (search-based discovery).

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool: when you need currently-live, viewer-ranked streams for a given Twitch game/category. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when-not-to-use conditions.

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