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

注释已声明只读、幂等、非破坏性，描述额外补充了“需要登录”这一重要前置条件，并解释了“好友”即互相关注，超越了注释已有信息。

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?

单句描述，登录要求置前，功能定义紧随其后，无冗余信息，高效且结构清晰。

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?

无输出 schema，描述提供了返回内容（三类关系列表及计数），足以指导调用。若进一步说明响应结构会更完善，但对无参工具的复杂度而言已较完整。

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?

工具无参数，schema 覆盖完整，描述无需补充参数信息。按规则 0 参数基线为 4。

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?

描述使用具体动词“返回”和明确资源“当前用户的关注/粉丝/好友列表与计数”，清晰说明工具功能。与列表中其他工具如 get_relationship、search_people 明显区分，不会混淆。

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?

描述明确限定为当前用户的关系网，使用场景清晰。但没有显式说明何时不应使用（如 get_relationship 或 search_people），不过由于作用域自明，不影响使用判断。

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