历史上的今天

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic function and omits important details such as whether it is read-only, if it caches results (despite the 'noCache' parameter), or any rate limits. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand potential 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 very concise (one sentence), but it lacks structure and detail. While brevity is positive, the description is under-specified for a tool with two parameters and no output schema. It could benefit from a brief breakdown of parameters and expected output.

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's simplicity (no output schema, two optional parameters), the description still falls short. It fails to explain the 'limit' parameter for pagination or the 'noCache' behavior. An agent cannot confidently determine the return format or how to effectively use the tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention any parameters. The input schema defines 'limit' and 'noCache' with basic types but provides no semantic meaning. The description adds no value beyond the schema, leaving the agent guessing about the purpose and acceptable values of the parameters.

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 '获取历史上的今天' clearly states the tool retrieves historical events for the current date. It is a specific verb+resource combination, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools such as 'weatheralarm' or 'earthquake', which also provide historical data in a sense.

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, nor does it mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or limitations. It leaves the agent to infer usage context from the name and title alone.

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