douyin_list_commented_videos

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

The description adds the scope '已成功评论' (successfully commented) and its deduplication purpose, which goes beyond the annotations. However, the '只读' (read-only) statement is redundant with the annotation readOnlyHint=true. No return format or pagination details are disclosed, which is acceptable given annotations but still limited.

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?

The description is two short sentences, front-loaded with the main action and scope, followed by a brief purpose note. Every word earns its place, and the redundant '只读' is minimal. Structure is highly efficient.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It states exactly what the tool returns (list of successfully commented videos) and why it's used (deduplication). No additional context is needed for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adds no param-specific info because there are none. This is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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?

The description uses a specific verb '查看' (view/list) with a clear resource '所有已成功评论的视频清单' (list of all successfully commented videos), and adds purpose context '跨活动去重的依据' (basis for cross-campaign deduplication). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search or inspect.

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?

It explains when to use this tool: as the basis for cross-campaign deduplication. This gives clear context for its intended use case, though it doesn't explicitly compare against alternatives or state when not to use it.

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