ecosystem_summary_top_n

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that every call saves a new report by default and how to opt out, but it omits other behavioral context such as whether the operation is read-only in part, permission requirements, or any limits.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is stated first, followed by the key default behavior, making it easy to scan.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values. For a tool with a major side effect and no annotations, it adequately covers the default save behavior, though it could say more about when to use it relative to sibling summary 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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters; baseline is 3. The description adds a meaningful nuance beyond the schema by emphasizing that the default behavior persists a new report and that save_report=False reads only.

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 states a specific output: a Top-N markdown table of ecosystem repos. This is clear and distinct from a generic summary, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling summary tools like ecosystem_summary_weekly, ecosystem_summary_by_tag, or ecosystem_summary_health.

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 gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over its many siblings. It only explains a parameter behavior (save_report default), which is not the same as tool-selection guidance or usage context.

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