Trending launches

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the ranking basis (upvotes) and the time-window semantics, but says nothing about result ordering stability, exhaustion of the list, or what a result entry represents.

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, no filler, with the core definition front-loaded and the usage hint second. Every clause carries information.

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?

A simple zero-required-parameter read tool whose parameters are fully documented in the schema; the description covers scope, ranking, and intent adequately. It slightly under-delivers on what a returned launch contains, which matters more since there is no output 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 description coverage is 100%: both limit (1-25, default 10) and period (today/week/month with defaults) are fully documented in the schema. The description restates the period concept in prose without adding granularity such as default limit or the week=7 days mapping, so it is baseline-level.

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?

Names a specific resource (launches) with a specific ranking criterion (most upvoted) and the three supported time windows. It implicitly distinguishes itself from siblings like get_launches and get_debut_of_the_day by emphasizing popularity, but never names or contrasts those alternatives.

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?

"Use it when a user asks what is popular, new or trending in software" gives a clear trigger condition mapped to user intent. It does not state when to prefer get_launches, browse_category, or get_debut_of_the_day instead, so exclusions are missing.

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