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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful boundary disclosure ('不返回作品列表' – does not return posted videos), but no auth, rate-limit, or pagination context. Modest value beyond annotations earns a 3.

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?

A single sentence with the purpose front-loaded, followed by the alternative routing rule and the scope boundary. Every clause earns its place with zero filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no prose. Purpose, alternative-tool routing, and the works-list exclusion are all covered; nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100% and the schema itself details the required URL format plus where to obtain it (search results, video detail, comment author profile_url). The description adds nothing beyond that, 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 (获取/retrieve) and resource (好看视频用户资料/user profile) scoped by input type (按用户主页链接/by homepage URL). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling haokan_get_user_info_by_user_id, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Names the alternative (haokan_get_user_info_by_user_id) and the exact condition that selects it (只有用户 ID 时/when only a user ID is available). The boundary note about not returning the works list further separates it from haokan_get_user_posted_videos_by_profile_url.

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