Popular Sharelists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds no new behavioral context (e.g., rate limits, auth requirements, or side effects) but does not contradict the annotations. It is consistent but minimal.

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 is a single, direct sentence that front-loads the verb and immediately conveys the purpose. There is no fluff or redundancy; every word contributes to understanding.

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 read-only tool with one optional parameter and a rich set of annotations, the description, schema, and output schema collectively provide sufficient information. The description lacks explicit criteria for 'popularity' but the overall context for a straightforward integer parameter tool is complete.

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 one parameter, 'count', with a clear description and default value. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the tool description adds nothing beyond what the schema already provides. The baseline of 3 applies as the description does not need to compensate.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('popular/trending community sharelists'), distinguishing it from other sharelist tools like sharelist_list or sharelist_detail by specifying 'community' and 'popular/trending'. This provides a specific purpose with a clear differentiation from siblings.

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. The description does not mention related tools or context (e.g., 'for your own lists, use sharelist_list'), leaving the agent to infer usage. There is no exclusion or alternative reference.

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