faceit_getHubLeaderboards

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions endpoint and returns list but does not disclose any behavioral traits like read-only nature, authentication needs, or rate limits. However, it implies a read operation.

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?

Description is reasonably concise: one sentence for purpose, one for usage, then endpoint and parameter list. It is front-loaded and structured logically.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, and endpoint. It lacks return format details but is sufficient for a list 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but description adds meaning: explains hub_id as path/required, offset as query with min 0, limit with min 1 max 100. This compensates well for missing schema descriptions.

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 'Retrieve all leaderboards of a hub' and 'list all leaderboards attached to a hub'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like getHubRanking and getHubSeasonRanking.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use to list all leaderboards attached to a hub. For a specific named ranking use getHubRanking (all-time) or getHubSeasonRanking (per season).' Provides clear when-to-use and alternatives.

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