truth_trending

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the explicit requirement that an authorized token is currently needed, including the nuance that this may change over time ('currently'). This is valuable operational context beyond the annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the tool's function, the second adds an essential auth note. No wasted words and the key information 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?

The tool is simple with a single optional parameter, a rich annotation set, and an existing output schema. The description covers the purpose and the critical auth requirement. It does not fully explain the limit parameter or alternatives, but overall it is sufficient for a tool of this complexity.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain the 'limit' parameter. The schema provides type, default, and bounds, but the description does not compensate for the missing semantic meaning. While 'limit' is conventionally understood, the description offers no direct support.

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 a specific action ('Fetch') and resource ('trending statuses'). The plural 'statuses' distinguishes it from single-status tools like truth_get_status and from search/home timeline tools. The name reinforces the purpose.

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 primary use case: fetching trending statuses. It also provides an important prerequisite (authorized token). However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over siblings like truth_search or truth_home_timeline, nor any exclusions.

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