trends_set_token

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

The description explains that the tool sets/removes tokens for rate limit purposes and specifies required permissions per provider. This adds context beyond annotations (idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false). However, it could mention that setting a token overwrites any existing token for that provider.

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 informative but somewhat lengthy. It front-loads the purpose and then details provider-specific instructions. A minor trim could improve conciseness without losing value.

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 presence of annotations and an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, parameters, usage, and removal behavior. It does not explain the output format, but that is likely covered by the output schema.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by listing the valid providers (github, hf, ncbi, openfda) and explaining that 'value' is the token string or empty to remove. No additional parameter info is needed.

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 sets or clears a rate-limit booster token for specific providers (github, hf, ncbi, openfda). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which focus on searching, trending, or configuration tasks.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: when to use (for rate limit boosting), what scopes to use (minimal for github, read-only for hf, API keys for others), and how to remove a token (empty string). It also warns against using 'repo' scope for github tokens.

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