zhihu_list_followees

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description goes beyond this by disclosing the pagination contract: omit cursor on first page, use returned next_cursor for subsequent pages, and stop when has_more=false. This is valuable behavioral information not present in the 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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and reads naturally. Every sentence adds meaningful usage information without 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?

For a paginated read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential operation: resource, default subject, and pagination protocol. It does not describe the return item structure, but '关注的人列表' makes the response type self-evident. The behavior is fully specified for practical use.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a bit of context by explaining the cursor flow and the default for url_token, but these details largely mirror the schema descriptions. It does not add substantial new parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 a specific verb+resource: '分页读取某用户「关注的人」列表' (paged read of a user's followees list). It clearly identifies the operation and the target resource, and it is distinguishable from siblings like zhihu_list_user_activity and zhihu_list_comments.

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 gives clear usage context: how to query the current user vs. a specific user via url_token, and how to handle pagination with cursor and has_more. It does not mention sibling alternatives or exclusions, but this is a simple list tool where the primary usage pattern is well explained.

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