read_activity

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

无注释，描述承担披露责任。提到文本量大可分页，但未说明权限、错误处理或返回格式。行为方面基本但不够全面。

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?

描述先提主要目的，再给出使用背景，最后逐参数说明。结构清晰，没有冗余信息，长度适中。

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?

解释了如何使用分页处理大量文本，涵盖了所有参数和基本行为。虽然有输出模式，但未提及返回内容的具体结构，不过对于读取工具已足够。

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?

描述中对每个参数都给出了解释和示例（如 event_id 的 'act31side'），补充了模式中缺失的语义（模式覆盖率0%），有效指导调用。

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?

明确指定了动作（读取）、资源（活动完整剧情台词）和范围（整个活动，按官方章节顺序合并）。与兄弟工具（如 read_story）自然区分开。

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?

提供了使用场景（需要了解完整活动故事）和分批获取的提示，但没有明确说明何时不使用或对比替代工具。

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