trending_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It never says whether this is a read-only listing, whether results are ordered or paginated, how many items are returned by default, or what state 'promoted / booked' actually reflects. For a zero-annotation tool this is a meaningful gap.

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?

A single short sentence with no wasted words, but the brevity comes at the cost of clarity — 'promoted / booked' leaves the core concept ambiguous rather than front-loading a crisp definition.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and undocumented parameters, the description would need to explain return shape, ordering, and filter behavior. Instead it provides one ambiguous line, leaving an agent unable to call this confidently against its many trending_* siblings.

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% for both parameters, and the description mentions neither 'chain' nor 'limit'. The 'chain' parameter is especially opaque since the schema types it as both string and number with no explanation of the difference — the description does nothing to compensate.

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?

States a verb ('List') and a resource ('trending tokens') with the qualifier 'promoted / booked'. However, the sibling set contains get_trending_tokens, trending_options, trending_register, and trending_booking_status, and the description gives no basis for telling this tool apart from those. The term 'booked' is also undefined jargon.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus get_trending_tokens or trending_booking_status, nor any prerequisites, filters, or exclusions. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

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