Polyrank trader teaser (by masked id)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds context about returning a masked skill teaser and the limitation of not providing full identity without signing in. It does not cover error cases or behavior for invalid tids, but is consistent with annotations.

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 extremely concise with three sentences covering purpose, source of tid, return type, and limitation. Every sentence adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema) and the presence of related sibling tools, the description provides adequate context: what it does, input source, return type, and a key limitation. It could mention error handling or tid validity but overall is sufficient for an agent to use it correctly.

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 describes the 'tid' parameter as an opaque trader id from a masked row (100% coverage). The description adds value by specifying where the tid originates (leaderboard, pulse, movers, top-ROI rows), which helps agents understand the context of the parameter beyond the schema.

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 looks up a trader by an opaque masked id (tid), specifying the source surfaces (leaderboard, pulse, movers, top-ROI rows). It explicitly distinguishes from wallet lookup and mentions the return type (masked skill teaser), making the purpose clear and specific.

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 explains when to use the tool (when you have a tid from masked rows) and when not (full identity resolution requires signing in). However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools like get_trader_calibration or get_trader_skill for other use cases, leaving some ambiguity.

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