豆瓣电影

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or caching behavior. The presence of a 'noCache' parameter hints at caching, but it is not explained. The description fails to inform the agent about side effects or operation characteristics.

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 extremely short (one sentence), but this brevity comes at the cost of missing critical information. It is not effectively front-loaded with the most important details beyond the basic purpose. The conciseness is not well-structured to aid understanding.

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?

Given the tool has 2 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should provide more context about the return format, pagination, and default behavior. It completely lacks these details, making it insufficient for an agent to use reliably.

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 input schema has two parameters ('limit' and 'noCache') with 0% description coverage in the schema. The tool description does not explain what these parameters control or any constraints. The agent must guess their meaning, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 '获取豆瓣新片榜' clearly states the action (获取) and the resource (豆瓣新片榜). It indicates the tool retrieves Douban's new movie list, which is a specific purpose. However, it could be more explicit about the scope (e.g., 'new movie rankings') and does not distinguish from potential sibling tools like 'douban-group', but since no sibling is specifically for movies, it is sufficient.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other content platforms). It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or preferred contexts. The only implied usage is when the user wants Douban new movie data, but no explicit direction is given.

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