B3TR: User app overview (totals)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. Description adds key behavioral details: the API endpoint, mutual exclusivity of filters, and that appId must be a 32-byte hex. No contradictions.

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?

Concise single paragraph that front-loads the purpose. All sentences add value (API path, return summary, appId resolution hint, filter constraints). No wasted words, though could be slightly tighter.

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 output schema exists, description does not need to explain return values. It sufficiently covers input constraints (appId format, filter mutual exclusivity) and provides necessary context for correct usage. Complete for the tool's complexity.

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 already covers all 4 parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. Description reinforces the appId format and mutual exclusivity of date/roundId, but adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get a users overview for a specific app' and lists exact return fields (B3TR rewards, rewarded actions, sustainability impact totals, global rankings). Distinct from sibling tools like getB3TRAppOverview (app-level) and getB3TRUserOverview (user-level without app specificity).

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 instructs to resolve app name to veBetterDaoId via getAppHubApps, and warns that roundId and date are mutually exclusive. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is clear enough.

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