Get Politicians P&L Leaderboard

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which is consistent. Description adds significant detail on estimation methodology (historical price estimation, FIFO, mark-to-market) and accuracy range (±25-40%), providing transparency beyond 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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose and then provides necessary methodology details. Slightly longer than necessary but well-structured and every sentence adds 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?

For a complex leaderboard with estimation methodology, the description adequately explains the calculation approach and accuracy. With an output schema likely present, return values need not be described, and the description covers the key behavioral aspects.

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%, so schema fully documents parameters. Description adds no extra meaning beyond listing sort options, which are already in schema enums.

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?

Clearly states it ranks politicians by estimated trading P&L, distinguishing it from siblings like get_politician_pnl (individual) and get_policy_trade_leaderboard (policy trades). The verb 'rank' and resource 'politicians P&L leaderboard' are 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?

Does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or provide exclusions. The purpose is clear from context, but no guidance on when not to use.

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