search_bilibili_videos

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the search function and criteria, but does not mention whether results are read-only, pagination, output format, or any constraints. This leaves significant behavioral ambiguity for an agent.

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 short sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and search criteria. There is no filler, redundant information, or unnecessary detail—every word earns its place.

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 is simple with one parameter and no output schema, but the description does not mention what the response contains (e.g., list of videos, metadata, sorting). Without annotations or an output schema, the lack of return information leaves the agent guessing about the result format, making it adequate but not complete.

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 defines 'keyword' only as '搜索关键词' (search keyword). The description adds that the keyword matches title or UP主 name, giving meaningful semantic context beyond the bare parameter description. This helps the agent understand how to construct the keyword value.

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 '搜索B站视频（根据标题或UP主名称）' clearly states the action (search), the resource (Bilibili videos), and the specific scope (by title or UP主 name). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_bilibili_hot, which retrieves hot videos, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 parenthetical '根据标题或UP主名称' provides clear context for when to use this tool—when searching by title or uploader name. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or scenarios to avoid, so it lacks the explicit exclusions that would earn a 5.

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