Get ranking

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey all behavioral traits. It only states the core function (getting ordered models) without disclosing behavior on invalid IDs, data freshness, rate limits, or whether it is read-only, which is assumed but not stated.

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, focused sentence with no unnecessary words, making it highly concise and front-loaded with the essential purpose.

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), the description is minimally adequate. However, without an output schema, it should hint at the result structure (e.g., 'list of model objects') to fully inform the agent.

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 100%, but the description adds value by linking the parameter to 'list_rankings', providing extra context on where to find valid ID values, improving upon the schema's example-based description.

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 gets ordered models for a specific ranking ID, and explicitly references the sibling tool 'list_rankings' for obtaining the ID, distinguishing it from listing all rankings.

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 provides usage context by indicating that the ranking ID comes from 'list_rankings', implying a workflow. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like 'get_model' for individual model details.

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