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

在注释已有readOnlyHint=true等基础上，额外提供口径：只对报名∪签到表，不返回敏感信息（手机号/微信/邮箱），walkIn仅限公开场次，超过500条截断且truncated=true。这些细节超出注释，帮助智能体理解数据边界。

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?

描述分为何时用、组合链、口径三部分，结构清晰，每句都有信息量，无冗余。虽然较长，但每一部分都必要。

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?

没有输出schema，但描述明确说明返回昵称和一句headline，不返回敏感字段，并提到截断标志。虽然未明确响应格式，但结合口径足够智能体理解结果。缺少分页或具体结构细节，但非必需。

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?

模式中activityRef已有描述（活动slug或id，来自list_my_activities等），覆盖率100%。描述没有重复参数信息，但未添加额外语义，符合基线3。

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?

明确说明工具做什么：对比报名单和到场名单，识别noShow和walkIn，并指出在App和网页上只能分开看。动词（获取）和资源（活动出席）清晰，与兄弟工具（如check_in_attendees）区分明显。

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?

明确说明何时使用（散场对名单），并给出组合链（本工具→check_in_attendees→start_activity_match_round），同时通过口径指出不包括售票情况，排除使用场景。前提条件（需要登录·主办方）也清晰。

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