add_subscribe

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the purpose and a data requirement but does not disclose side effects, return values, error handling, duplicate behavior, or permission requirements. This is minimal for a write operation.

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 brief and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by the key requirement. However, the 'Args: subscribe_data: 订阅数据' line is redundant with the schema parameter name and adds no new information, slightly reducing conciseness.

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 tool accepts a complex Subscribe object with ~30 fields, has no output schema, and no annotations. The description omits return behavior, error conditions, and how the subscription will be processed, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior and consequences.

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?

The schema's top-level parameter 'subscribe_data' has no description (coverage 0%). The description adds a crucial validation rule—requiring at least one of tmdbid, doubanid, or bangumiid—which is not expressed in the schema. It does not explain the many nested fields, but they are present in the schema with some descriptions, so the added rule is significant.

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 '添加新的媒体订阅' (Add new media subscription), specifying the verb 'add' and resource 'subscription'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_subscribes, get_subscribe, update_subscribe, and delete_subscribe, as it uniquely indicates creation.

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 provides a clear prerequisite: subscription data must contain at least one of tmdbid, doubanid, or bangumiid. This gives context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., for updates).

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