telegram_trending

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the tool as returning data (read-only implied), but does not explicitly state non-destructive behavior or other traits like pagination, data freshness, or rate limits. For a simple query tool this is adequate but minimal.

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 concise: three sentences for purpose and usage, followed by a structured list of parameters. No filler; every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with core purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, scope, parameter details, and a clear alternative for sibling tool. Complete for its complexity.

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%, yet the description adds complete parameter semantics: hours (time range), top (count), kind (with enum values stock/etf/all). All defaults are listed, and the meaning of each parameter is clearly explained.

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 states it returns top stocks by Telegram mention volume within a period (specific verb+resource). It distinguishes itself from the sibling telegram_search by noting it is 'exclusive for stock code matching' and contrasts with macro/thematic questions.

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?

Explicitly states when to use the tool ('stock code matching') and when not to (macro/thematic questions using telegram_search). Also provides parameter defaults and explanations, giving concrete usage context.

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