bilibili_send_danmaku

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

Discloses critical behavioral traits: strict risk control, potential blocking for new or frequent accounts, and a daily limit recommendation. With no annotations, description carries full burden and handles it well.

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 sentences: first states purpose, second adds crucial risk warning. No filler, highly efficient.

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?

Covers purpose and risk, but lacks information about authentication prerequisites and expected return (success/failure). For a sending tool, this is a minor gap.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds no extra parameter-specific info beyond what the schema already provides in parameter descriptions.

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 sends a danmaku to a video, with specific verb '发送' and resource '视频'. It distinguishes from siblings like bilibili_video_danmaku which retrieves danmakus.

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?

Provides strong guidance on when not to use: warns about strict risk control and advises maximum 5 per day. Lacks explicit mention of alternatives for getting danmakus, but context is clear.

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