buygit_trending

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that results are ranked, include specific fields, and can be filtered by category and period. Missing: authentication needs or caching behavior, but adequate for a read-only trending tool.

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 sentences: first defines functionality, second provides usage context. Efficient and front-loaded, though slightly informal phrasing ('carrying').

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 has 3 optional params and an output schema, the description covers the core purpose, filtering options, and output fields. It is sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to use it.

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 has 0% description coverage, so description must compensate. It explains period (day/week/month) and category, but does not explain the limit parameter (default 10, controls count). Two of three parameters are clarified.

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 'top crawler listings ranked by recent activity' with specific fields (license, risk, popularity, pricing). It explicitly contrasts with 'GitHub trending noise', differentiating it from sibling tools like search or get_listing.

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 provides a clear use case: 'Use for "what is hot right now in <category>"'. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is well defined.

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