madeonsol_kol_leaderboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds only PRO+ feature context. No contradictions. The description does not detail side effects or restrictions beyond schema, which is acceptable given safe annotations.

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?

Two sentences, directly front-loaded with purpose. Every word is necessary and efficient. No redundant or filler content.

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?

No output schema, so description could explain return format (e.g., list of KOLs with PnL, win rate, rank). It does not, leaving some ambiguity. However, tool name implies leaderboard. Adequate but not fully complete.

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 coverage is 100% with clear enum descriptions. The description adds that sorting defaults to 'pnl' and that certain parameters are PRO+ features. This adds value beyond the schema, though minor.

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 retrieves KOL performance rankings by PnL and win rate, with explicit reference to PRO+ sorting options. This distinguishes it from siblings like madeonsol_alpha_leaderboard and other KOL tools.

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 implies usage for KOL rankings but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives (e.g., KOL feed, pnl, etc.). No guidance on when not to use. Adequate but lacks explicit when-to/when-not.

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