daily_hot_get_multi

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

With no annotations, the description reasonably covers key behaviors: concurrency control, TTL caching, and per-source failure isolation. It does not mention rate limits or auth requirements, but provides essential usage 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 two sentences, each delivering critical information: core functionality and a key behavioral note. No extraneous words.

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 parameter richness and lack of output schema, the description covers the main behavioral aspects. Missing details like result structure or source limits, but sufficient for correct invocation.

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 parameter descriptions. The description adds contextual value (concurrency, caching) but does not elaborate on parameter specifics beyond what is in the schema.

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 identifies the tool as batch retrieval of hot lists from multiple sources with concurrency control and TTL caching. It distinguishes from siblings like daily_hot_get (single source) and cache management 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 use for multiple sources, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives. It provides valuable context about concurrency, caching, and error isolation, aiding appropriate tool selection.

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