B3TR: App users leaderboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's behavioral additions (pagination, mutual exclusivity) are helpful but not critical. No contradictions with 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?

Single sentence, 27 words, front-loaded with main action. No redundant or trivial details.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers pagination, filters, and endpoint. It provides sufficient context for a read-only leaderboard tool.

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% and the description adds extra context: mutual exclusivity between date and roundId, and a resolution hint for appId (resolve via getAppHubApps). Not all parameters are described, but the added info is valuable.

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 verb 'Get' and specific resource 'user B3TR action leaderboard for a given app', differentiating from sibling tools like getB3TRUsersLeaderboard (global) or getB3TRAppsLeaderboard (app-level). The API endpoint is explicitly mentioned.

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 lists optional filters and pagination but does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives (e.g., getB3TRUsersLeaderboard for global leaderboard). Usage context is implied through the app-specific scope but not directly clarified.

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