bilibili_detect_replies

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. It states it lists new content since last check and does not auto-reply, but does not disclose how 'last check' is tracked (stateful?), or any side effects, rate limits, or auth requirements. More detail on state management would be beneficial.

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?

Two short sentences with no fluff. Purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value. Very concise.

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, the description could explain the return format (e.g., list of reply objects). It says 'list new content' but not how results are structured. Also lacks details on pagination or what constitutes 'new'. Adequate but not fully complete.

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 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters (max and videoId). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool detects new replies under Bilibili videos/comments, listing new content since last check. It distinguishes from auto-reply by explicitly stating it does not auto-reply, which differentiates it from sibling siblings like 'bilibili_reply'.

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 implies usage for detecting new replies and explicitly states it requires manual confirmation before operation, advising against auto-reply usage. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternatives like bilibili_video_comments or bilibili_notifications.

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