GitHub Trending

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and external-data nature are covered. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond that: no mention of the 25-item cap, the daily/weekly/monthly windows, rate limits, or how results are ordered. With annotations carrying the safety profile the bar is lower, but this description contributes no additional behavioral context.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words and the core resource stated first. It is terse, though whether that brevity reflects conciseness or under-specification is arguable.

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 4-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It omits the limit cap of 25, the daily/weekly/monthly time windows, and the spoken_language filter, leaving the agent to read the schema for the tool's actual scope.

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 50%: language and spoken_language are documented in the schema, while limit and since are not. The description only restates the language filter, which the schema already explains, so it adds no meaning for the undocumented limit ceiling or the since enum.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Get trending GitHub repositories") and names the filtering dimension, so an agent immediately knows what it returns. It is implicitly distinct from the news/paper siblings, but the description never explicitly contrasts itself with tech_trends_digest or the other trend sources.

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?

"optionally filtered by programming language" hints at one usage mode but gives no when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no routing versus siblings like tech_trends_digest. An agent gets no guidance on when GitHub trending is the right source over the alternatives.

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