get_trending

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds useful context: sorting by star velocity, time window (this week), and the intent to show popular/trending items. However, it fails to disclose whether the operation is read-only, any rate limits, or what happens if the limit parameter exceeds the schema constraints. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 consists of two concise sentences that directly convey the tool's purpose and value. No unnecessary words or redundancy. Every sentence 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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what is returned (AI projects), the source (AiList), the timeframe (this week), and the sorting (star velocity). The tool's simplicity means no additional information is needed for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 input schema has only one parameter (limit) with 100% description coverage. The schema already defines the default, min, max, and purpose of limit. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what is in the schema, so baseline 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 'trending Ai projects on AiList', and specifies the time frame 'this week' and sorting 'by star velocity'. It also adds a broader purpose sentence about discovering popularity. This distinguishes it well from sibling tools like search_projects and get_project.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_projects or list_categories. It only implies using it to check trending projects, but with 7 sibling tools, explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use information is missing.

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