Trending Developers

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

With annotations present, the description still adds meaningful context: it discloses that calls potentially consume paid API credits, that confirm=true is required, and it explains the read-like POST nature so the agent understands why readOnlyHint is false. This goes beyond what the annotations alone convey.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose and return shape first, then usage/value notes, then the credit and confirm constraint. Every sentence carries information and nothing is padded.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description enumerates expected return fields, covers all parameters via schema, and states the credit/confirm behavioral requirement. It is close to complete, though the pagination/ranking behavior and any rate limits are unstated.

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 all four parameters are already documented in-schema, including examples for language and the enum for since. The description's restatement of language/since values adds marginal value, 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 (scrapes) and resource (GitHub's public Trending developers page), and enumerates the returned fields (username, name, profile URL, avatar, popular repo). This clearly separates it from the sibling github_trending_repositories.

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 gives value hints ('Use language for paths like javascript or python and since for daily/weekly/monthly') but these are parameter examples rather than when-to-use routing. It never says when to pick this over github_trending_repositories or any other sibling, leaving usage implied.

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