souyun_poem

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 adds the '免token' (no token needed) detail, but does not explain the return format, pagination behavior, error handling, or any limitations. The query dimensions are functional parameters, not behavioral traits.

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 a single, compact sentence that conveys the tool's purpose, query dimensions, and intended use case. It is front-loaded with the tool's name and avoids unnecessary verbiage; every phrase earns its place.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is not fully complete. It does not explain return values, how parameters combine, or page number semantics. However, the schema covers most parameters, and the core purpose is clear, so it is a minimal viable description with gaps.

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 coverage is 83%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds mapping of keyword to author/title/verse and mentions rhyme/dynasty/genre, but does not elaborate on pageno or scope nuances. It adds some value beyond the schema but not enough to exceed the baseline.

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 explicitly names the tool as '搜韵诗词检索' (Souyun poem search) and lists queryable dimensions (author/title/verse/dynasty/genre/rhyme), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like souyun_rhyme and souyun_couplet. The verb '检索' (search) plus the resource '诗词' (poems) makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 mentions the use case '服务 AIGC 歌词' (serving AIGC lyrics), implying when to use it, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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