get_bilibili_hot

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'get hot video data' and does not mention caching behavior, return format, data freshness, or the fact that use_cache defaults to true.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. It is concise but very brief, omitting behavioral context that other dimensions capture; still, it is not padded or unclear.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and sibling tools for search and cache clearing, the description is incomplete. It leaves out caching semantics, what the returned data looks like, and how it differs from search_bilibili_videos.

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 provides 100% description coverage for both parameters: count and use_cache. The tool description adds no parameter-level context beyond what the schema already explains, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses an explicit verb '获取' (get) and a specific resource 'B站热门视频数据' (Bilibili hot video data). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as get_baidu_hot_search (different platform) and search_bilibili_videos (search vs. hot rankings).

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention that it retrieves a trending/hot list rather than search results, nor any relationship to clear_bilibili_cache or search_bilibili_videos.

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