fc analytics top post starters

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real value beyond them: it discloses the FluentCommunity Pro native report permission requirement and the fact that the result is bounded to ten members rather than a full audience export.

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 first sentence is well front-loaded and earns its place. The controller/route-source line is internal implementation metadata that gives an agent no actionable guidance and dilutes the definition.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly states the return shape (ten members plus post counts), and it notes the permission requirement. Only a slightly fuller statement of the time-range expectation would make it fully self-contained.

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% and the single optional 'account' param is fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about how the account label interacts with the report scope, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource+metric: the ten members with the most posts in the requested range, each with a post count. It is clearly distinguishable from comment-oriented siblings, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with fc_analytics_top_members, which could also sound like a ranked member list.

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?

Usage is implied by the reporting context and the permission note, and the trailing clause rules out one misuse (it is not a whole-site audience export). But there is no explicit when-to-use vs. the sibling analytics tools (top_members, top_commenters, member_activity).

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