网易云歌单账号能力状态

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

注解已声明 readOnlyHint=true，描述在此基础上补充了具体检查项和“不返回任何 Cookie 值”的敏感信息边界，增强了行为透明度；但未说明返回值结构或可能的状态枚举。

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?

描述仅用一句话完成，前段说明核心检查动作，分号后明确否定边界，信息密度高且无冗余。

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?

对于零参数、只读的状态检查工具，描述已覆盖检查范围和敏感信息排除项；但缺少输出 schema，且未说明返回值的具体格式或语义，存在轻微信息缺口。

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?

工具没有参数，输入 schema 覆盖率为 100%，描述无需补充参数含义；按 0 参数基线评为 4。

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?

描述使用明确的动词“检查”和具体对象“账号写入功能是否已启用、是否配置会话文件”，清楚指明了工具的作用范围，并且通过“只检查”和“不返回任何 Cookie 值”与歌单写入、状态查询等兄弟工具区分开。

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?

描述暗示该工具用于确认账号写入能力和会话配置状态，但没有明确说明在什么场景下应使用它而非其他状态类或写操作类工具，也未给出排除条件或前置流程指引。

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