trending_list

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

The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations already establish that this is a safe read operation over external data. The description adds the temporal scope 'currently promoted / booked', but it does not disclose pagination, result shape, rate limits, or how the listing is ordered.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted text. However, it is arguably too sparse given the undocumented parameters, and the slash phrasing 'promoted / booked' adds slight ambiguity.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema and no schema descriptions, the description is incomplete. It says what is listed but not how chain or limit affect the result, nor what the returned list contains.

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 schema has two parameters, chain and limit, with 0% description coverage, so the description needs to compensate. It does not mention either parameter or explain filtering by chain or limiting the number of results.

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 verb and resource: listing currently promoted/booked trending tokens. It is clear enough to understand the operation, but it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools such as get_trending_tokens, get_top_tokens, or trending_booking_status.

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 use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The phrase 'currently promoted / booked' implies a context, but it does not route the agent among similar trending-token tools.

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