get_top_following

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

In the absence of annotations, the description discloses the key behavioral trait: it returns exactly 20 accounts sorted by Sorsa Score. This provides sufficient behavioral context for a simple read operation, though it could specify the ordering direction (descending) or note that it is read-only.

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 of 11 words, front-loaded with key information, and contains no redundant or unnecessary content. Every word earns its place.

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 retrieval tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it specifies the resource, the filtering criterion (top 20 by Sorsa Score), and the limit. However, it could mention the ordering direction and that at least one parameter should be provided, though not required.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as which parameter is preferred or how they relate. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'top following', and the specific criteria: '20 accounts a user follows with the highest Sorsa Score.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_following' (all followed accounts) and 'get_top_followers' (followers, not following).

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 the tool is used when you need the top 20 followed accounts by Sorsa Score, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The agent can infer from the name and description but lacks explicit guidance.

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