Get top session events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are aggregated (not raw events) and ranked by magnitude, but says nothing about pagination behavior, default channel resolution, or what happens when no channel is supplied.

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 well-formed sentence with no waste and the key scoping idea (aggregation over an interval) front-loaded. It could be slightly tighter given that it restates information largely inferable from the title.

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?

With 5 optional parameters and no output schema, the description should at least hint at the shape of returned ranking data (e.g. who is ranked, what metric). It covers the aggregation concept but leaves the return structure and default-channel behavior unexplained.

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 100%, so every parameter (type, limit, offset, channel, interval) is already documented with defaults and enum values. The description's examples ('biggest tips or cheers') loosely echo the type and interval options but add no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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 (get) and resource (top events) and clarifies the aggregation dimension (over an interval) with examples like biggest tips or cheers. It is clear on its own, but does not distinguish itself from close siblings such as tips_top, activities_top, or points_list_top, which an agent must choose between.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus sessions_get, tips_top, or activities_top, and no stated prerequisites or exclusions. The agent gets only the name and a terse purpose statement to decide.

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