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

注释仅有openWorldHint，描述未额外披露行为细节，但工具为只读统计查询，风险低，且描述说明了统计范围，足以支撑使用。

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?

描述精炼，包含核心功能、排除项和示例，但定价信息非必需，略微冗余，不过整体结构清晰。

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?

有输出schema，描述无需解释返回值，且提供了典型问法，但未明确说明地区支持的具体级别（如是否支持乡镇），总体足够。

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已覆盖全部三个参数的描述（region、chain_name、year），描述未额外添加参数细节，但典型问法间接示例了参数用法，基线合理。

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?

描述明确说明按地区和产业链统计专利数量，包含指标类型，并清楚列出不包含的内容（明细列表、企业名单、海外专利），与兄弟工具如chain_company_num（公司数量）有本质区别。

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?

给出了典型问法示例，指导何时使用（询问专利数量时），但不包含其他工具的明确排除说明，不过通过'不包含'清单隐含了边界。

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