x_api_get_trends_by_woeid

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well. It states 'Risk: read-only', required bearer token, environment-selection behavior for scopes and credentials, expected response shape, common failure conditions, and safety warnings about sensitive data. This goes well beyond the minimal 'read-only' and provides actionable context.

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 well-structured with clear labeled sections. Each sentence adds value: risk, permissions, environment behavior, parameter constraints, response shape, failures, recommended tools, safety, and an example. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity and not padded with fluff.

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 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is remarkably comprehensive. It covers the operation, constraints, auth/auth resolution, response shape, failure modes, prerequisites, and provides a concrete example. The inclusion of follow-up tools and safety warnings makes it a complete guide for the agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains woeid and max_trends with path/query and type constraints, and elaborates on scopeTenantId, scopeUserId/scopeAccountId, and credentialKey in the environment-selection section. However, authorizationKey and preferredAuthType are not explained, leaving a gap for those parameters.

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 starts with 'Get Trends by WOEID', a specific verb and resource that clearly identifies the operation. It distinguishes from the sibling x_api_get_trends_personalized_trends by the WOEID scope, and the rest of the description reinforces this.

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 'Use when' line merely repeats the description without adding context. The 'Do not use when' section gives useful exclusions (auth/config tools, exploration) and names x_schema_discovery and x_query_suggestion as alternatives, but it does not explicitly direct users to the competing trends tool (x_api_get_trends_personalized_trends) as an alternative for personalized trends.

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