trending

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It mentions 'community-driven' and 'right now', which hints at source and freshness, but does not explain ordering, update frequency, data fields returned, or any limitations. This is a significant gap for a tool with no output schema.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core concept. It contains no filler or redundant content, earning a top score for conciseness.

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, parameterless tool this description provides a basic context, but it does not clarify the output format or how it differs from the similarly named top_movers sibling. The absence of an output schema makes the lack of return-value information more noticeable, though the simple nature of the tool mitigates the gap.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter syntax or semantics. The baseline score of 4 applies, and the description contains no irrelevant parameter information.

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 identifies the resource (IDX stocks) and timeframe (right now), and 'trending' implies a listing/display action. It also adds a distinguishing trait ('community-driven') that separates it from likely sibling tools like top_movers, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or '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 phrase 'right now' implies real-time use, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like top_movers or sentiment_stream. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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