Get Richgo AI rankings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The term 'fetch' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as rate limits, response format, or potential side effects.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose. No wasted words.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters and no output schema or annotations. The description does not explain the return format, pagination, error handling, or any constraints beyond the schema defaults. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 60% schema coverage (3 of 5 parameters have descriptions), the baseline is 3. The description merely lists the filter names without adding meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain how parameters interact or provide examples.

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 fetches Richgo AI ranking tab and lists the available filters (country, market, sort, top, tier). This verb+resource+scope makes it distinct from sibling tools like richgo_get_scores or richgo_get_undervalued.

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 implies usage for fetching rankings with filters, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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