cc98_get_user

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

没有注解，描述承担行为披露责任。说明是查询操作（只读），返回资料和最近发帖，但未提及返回数据的数量、格式、分页等细节。行为基本透明，但缺乏深度。

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?

描述仅一句话，中文表达简洁，先说明功能再说明参数要求，信息密度高，无冗余。

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?

工具简单（2个可选参数），无输出模式。描述告知返回公开资料和最近发帖，足以让代理理解基本行为。未说明最近发帖的数量或排序，但整体完整度足够。

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?

输入模式已对每个参数提供了描述（用户名精确匹配、用户ID）。描述额外强调了只需提供其中之一，这增加了参数间互斥关系的语义信息，超越了模式本身。

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?

描述明确说明了工具的功能：查询CC98用户的公开资料及其最近发帖，并指定需要提供user_id或name其中之一。与兄弟工具（如cc98_get_board_topics、cc98_get_posts）明显区分，目标清晰。

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?

描述了使用条件（提供user_id或name），但未明确说明何时不使用此工具或提及替代工具。尽管如此，使用场景明确，对于获取用户信息而言足够直接。

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