购买动态住宅流量

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: it tells the agent that the operation will deduct from the account balance, that permanent packages never expire while term packages require bill_timelen, and that account verification is required. These details complement the destructiveHint already provided by annotations.

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 only two sentences, with the most important side effect (balance deduction) front-loaded, followed by essential package rules and prerequisites. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers billing, package types, and prerequisites, but does not mention the two-call confirmation flow described under confirm_token. Since the schema explains that flow, the gap is partially mitigated, but the tool is complex (5 params, no output schema) and the description could be more self-sufficient.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces that num is in GB and explains the relationship between product type and bill_timelen, which adds slight clarity, but most parameter meaning is already captured in the schema.

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 states a specific verb ('购买' / purchase) and resource ('动态住宅流量' / dynamic residential traffic), and clarifies the two product variants (permanent vs term). While it doesn't explicitly name sibling tools, the resource and product scope distinguish it from siblings like order_buy_ipv6 and order_buy_time_ip.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states preconditions (account verification) and package-type rules; it does not mention sibling tools or conditions that would select one over another.

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