Polyrank Smart-Money Report (one week)

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds some transparency about the report content (sections) but does not disclose any behavioral traits like response size or performance. Since annotations provide the core behavioral context, a 3 is appropriate.

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 with zero wasted words: the first lists the tool's output components, the second tells how to acquire the required input. Perfectly front-loaded and efficient.

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 get-report tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It details what the report contains and where to get the identifier. No additional context is needed for correct invocation.

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 schema already documents the 'week' parameter with description and example format. The description reinforces this by stating 'Report/week id from the archive' and gives an example '2026-w26'. This adds clarity beyond the schema, earning a 4 rather than a 3.

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 returns a full weekly Smart-Money Report with specific sections (big wins, skill-rank movers, etc.), and distinguishes it from the sibling tool polyrank_get_smart_money_reports by instructing to pass the week/report id from that list.

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 a clear usage pattern: obtain the id from polyrank_get_smart_money_reports and then pass it here. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternative sibling tools, but the purpose is well-defined enough for an agent to infer the appropriate context.

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