madeonsol_scout_leaderboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by noting the 'ULTRA only' restriction, which is not in annotations. No contradictions; behavioral traits are well-covered.

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 sentence that packs all essential information: resource, ranking criteria, and usage restriction. No redundant words, and the main purpose is front-loaded.

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 (3 parameters, no output schema, rich annotations), the description covers the core purpose and key metrics. Minor gaps: it doesn't explicitly state that the sort parameter controls the ranking axis, but this is inferable. Overall, sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by defining the metrics (first-touch frequency, swarm attraction rate) that correspond to sort options, providing context beyond the schema's enum values. However, it does not detail the limit or scout_tier parameters explicitly.

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 a scout leaderboard ranking top KOLs by specific metrics (scout score, first-touch frequency, swarm attraction rate). It distinguishes from sibling 'madeonsol_kol_leaderboard' by being scout-specific and mentioning 'ULTRA only', making the purpose explicit and differentiated.

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 ULTRA tier users but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like the general KOL leaderboard. There's no mention of when not to use or direct comparison with siblings, leaving the agent to infer context from the name and metrics.

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