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

Annotations already supply readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that only publicly posted videos are returned and accepts several profile URL forms, but it does not disclose additional behavioral details beyond that; pagination behavior is handled in the schema. No contradiction.

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 short sentences convey purpose, accepted input forms, and key exclusions without filler. The most important routing information is front-loaded ahead of the schema 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?

With an output schema, full parameter descriptions, annotations, and explicit sibling differentiation, the definition provides everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly. The guidance to avoid video links and to switch to the user_id tool is especially valuable.

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 each parameter already has detailed documentation, including sort_type enums and the opaque page_token contract. The description mostly reiterates the profile_url constraints rather than adding new parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 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?

States a specific action and resource type: '获取公开发布视频列表' from a B站用户主页链接, short link, or share text. It explicitly excludes wrong inputs ('不要传视频链接'), which distinguishes it from by_user_id and sibling content tools.

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?

Provides clear when-to-use guidance: use when given a profile URL/short link/share text; do not use for video links. It also explicitly routes to the user_id tool when user_id is already available, making the choice between by_profile_url and by_user_id unambiguous.

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