run_producthunt_launches

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: 'Get' implies a read-only lookup, the returned fields are enumerated, and the cost ('Flat 5 points per successful run') is disclosed. It does not cover not-found behavior or auth requirements, so it is not fully transparent.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and then the returned fields, followed by the cost note. There is no filler, and every clause contributes useful 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?

With no output schema, the description usefully lists the launch fields an agent can expect, which is the main completeness need here. It still omits failure behavior for invalid slugs/URLs, but covers the essential purpose and response content.

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 the only parameter is already well documented in the schema. The description repeats that it accepts a slug or URL but adds no format or validation detail beyond the schema example.

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 and resource: 'Get one Product Hunt launch by slug or URL.' It names the entity and distinguishes this single-launch lookup from the many Product Hunt search/list siblings by requiring an identifier and returning one launch.

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?

Usage context is clear: call this when you already have a launch slug or Product Hunt URL. It does not explicitly name the alternative search tool for discovery, but the identifier-based usage condition is sufficiently clear to route an agent.

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