create_leaderboard

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses auto-fetching of developer_id and app_id, and mentions return value. However, it does not mention potential side effects, error cases, or required permissions, which would elevate it to 5.

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?

Two sentences plus a prerequisite note. Every sentence adds value: prerequisite check, action, auto-fetch behavior, return value. No redundancy.

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 7 parameters and no output schema, description covers purpose, prerequisite, key behaviors, and return value. Lacks error handling or limitations, but sufficient for most use cases.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context about auto-fetching developer_id and app_id, but does not elaborate on parameter options beyond what schema provides. No additional semantic guidance.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create a new leaderboard on TapTap server' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_leaderboards, publish_leaderboard, and get_leaderboard_integration_guide by focusing on creation and auto-fetching context.

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 states prerequisite that an app must be selected and provides step-by-step guidance to call get_current_app_info, list_developers_and_apps, and select_app if needed. Also clarifies that it returns leaderboard_id for client-side APIs.

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