madeonsol_kol_leaderboard

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the context that sorting by alternative axes (winrate, roi, etc.) requires a PRO+ subscription, which is a useful behavioral trait. However, it does not detail other aspects like data freshness or pagination behavior.

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 consists of two concise sentences that front-load the primary purpose and quickly convey additional functionality (PRO+ sorting). No redundant or irrelevant information is present.

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 leaderboard query, the description covers the main functionality. However, with no output schema, it does not specify the structure of returned results (e.g., fields like KOL name, PnL, win rate). While the name implies a ranking list, the absence of output details slightly reduces completeness.

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 input schema covers all parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description supplements by clarifying that the default sort is by PnL/win rate and that alternative sort axes are PRO+-only, providing meaning beyond the schema's enum list. This adds value for parameter understanding.

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 the tool returns KOL performance rankings by PnL and win rate, with a specific verb 'Get'. The name 'kol_leaderboard' further distinguishes it from sibling leaderboards like alpha_leaderboard or scout_leaderboard, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as madeonsol_alpha_leaderboard or madeonsol_scout_leaderboard. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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