polygon_trending

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the transparency burden. It usefully discloses the pay-per-call cost and freshness, but it does not clarify whether the call is read-only, how results are returned, or what side effects or failure modes exist.

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?

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 description is too sparse for a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented optional parameter. It never addresses the fields argument, return shape, freshness cadence, or how payment/cost affects retries or data availability.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for fields, and the description does not explain what fields can be passed or what effect the optional fields parameter has. The description adds no meaning beyond the raw parameter name, so the agent is left guessing.

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?

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 says this is a fresh feed for agents, implying a real-time read use case, and the name implies it is the Polygon counterpart to base_trending. However, it never explicitly states when to use it vs. alternatives like base_trending or other polygon data tools.

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