果壳

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as caching (despite a noCache parameter), rate limits, or what constitutes 'hot' articles. This leaves the agent uninformed about side effects or constraints.

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 concise (one short phrase). While it is not verbose, it lacks substantive structure and could benefit from more detail without sacrificing brevity.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and insufficient parameter guidance, the description fails to provide a complete picture. An agent cannot reliably understand the output format, pagination, or error handling from this description alone.

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 2 parameters (limit, noCache) with 0% description coverage in the schema, and the description adds no parameter explanation. The agent has to infer the meaning of 'limit' and 'noCache' without any context.

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 '获取果壳热门文章' (Get Guokr hot articles) clearly states the verb (get) and resource (Guokr hot articles). The unique name and title help distinguish it from sibling tools, but there is no explicit differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or what context it's suited for. The description only states what it does, not when or 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.