zhihu_list_replies

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already conveys safety. The description adds concrete pagination behavior (first page no cursor, use next_cursor later) and explains the provenance of comment_id, which goes beyond structured 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?

Two compact sentences fully convey the operation, pagination flow, and parameter provenance without repetition or filler.

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 simple read-only paginated list tool, the description covers the workflow adequately. It lacks details about response contents or auth requirements, but the pagination instructions and schema fill most gaps.

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 parameters are already well-documented. The description adds extra semantic value by specifying that comment_id comes from zhihu_list_comments, which helps the agent source the correct 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 explicitly states the tool reads paginated nested replies for a given first-level comment (分页读取某条一级评论的楼中楼回复). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tool zhihu_list_comments by targeting replies to a comment rather than top-level 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?

It provides clear usage context: comment_id comes from zhihu_list_comments and cursor handling for pagination. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, but the relationship to the sibling list tool makes the use case evident.

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