bilibili_user_info

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

No annotations are present, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only lists output fields but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has rate limits. The description is minimal but not misleading.

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?

Description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action and includes a list of example outputs. No redundant or extraneous words; every part of the sentence adds value.

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 has one parameter and no output schema, the description lists several output fields but ends with '等' (etc.), leaving some vagueness. It covers essential information for a simple info retrieval tool but could be more explicit about the full output structure.

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% as the single parameter 'uid' is described as '用户 UID'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it focuses on output fields rather than enriching parameter understanding.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('获取 B站用户信息') and lists specific fields (昵称, 签名, 等级, 粉丝数, 关注数, 直播间信息), distinguishing it from sibling tools like bilibili_user_dynamics or bilibili_live_info. The verb+resource combination is specific.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. While the purpose is clear, it does not differentiate from alternatives like bilibili_user_dynamics or bilibili_live_info, leaving the agent to infer based on tool name alone.

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