category_top_growers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds little behavioral detail beyond the purpose. It does not explain how results are sorted, default limits, or other behavior, leaving the agent to guess.

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 concise with two sentences and a front-loaded purpose. No fluff, but it could be improved by adding a brief note on ordering or defaults without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the 19 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'biggest recent growth' means, default returned count, or how to interpret results, leaving significant gaps.

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?

With only 26% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for the many undocumented parameters. It provides no parameter-level guidance, making it hard for the agent to use filters effectively.

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 tool finds brands in a category with the biggest recent growth in seller count and observations, and provides example user queries. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling tools like 'brands_gaining_sellers'.

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?

The description gives example queries and specifies 'any category-scoped growth question', indicating when to use it. However, it lacks guidance on when not to use it or alternatives, leaving boundaries unclear.

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