Trending media

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: the shared result shape with media_search, that `mdx` can be pasted into a slide unchanged, and that credits are automatic via headmatter — practical behavioral context not in the annotations.

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 core statement ('What's popular now in a kind, with no query') is front-loaded, followed by a useful source list and two short usage notes. It is dense but every clause carries information; the source enumeration is slightly long but earns its place for kind selection.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be spelled out, yet the description usefully notes the mdx/preview/attribution/id shape and how to consume mdx. Combined with the credits note, it is complete enough for correct invocation; only the set-per-deck constraint lives solely in the schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so kind, set, and limit are fully documented in the schema itself. The description reinforces the 'no query / by kind' framing but adds no syntax or constraints beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb+resource ('What's popular now in a kind, with no query') and enumerates exactly which sources feed each kind (KLIPY GIFs, Imgflip templates, emoji, icon sets, Kadal). An agent can distinguish this from media_search immediately.

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?

It clearly frames the usage context ('with no query') and explicitly points to media_search as the shared result-shape sibling, implying the query-based alternative. It stops short of an explicit 'use this when X, use media_search when Y' rule, so a 4 rather than a 5.

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