爱范儿

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only indicates a read operation ('get') but fails to mention rate limits, data freshness, response format, or side effects. The existence of a 'noCache' parameter hints at caching behavior, but no explanation is given.

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 line in Chinese). While this is a virtue, it lacks structure and does not convey enough information to be useful. It earns its place by stating the core function but adds no elaboration.

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 presence of 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, how parameters affect behavior, or any edge cases. An AI agent would have to guess or rely on external knowledge to invoke the tool 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 input schema has 2 parameters (limit, noCache) with zero description coverage. The description provides no additional meaning for these parameters, not even a hint about their purpose or allowed values. A user cannot infer how to use them correctly from the description alone.

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 '获取爱范儿快讯' clearly states the verb (获取/get) and resource (爱范儿快讯/ifanr news), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It inherently distinguishes from sibling tools which target different platforms, but does not explicitly scope the results (e.g., recent vs. all news).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about typical use cases, prerequisites, or situations where one of the many sibling tools would be more appropriate.

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