list_bilibili_favorite_videos

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

The description clearly discloses important behavioral aspects: it returns only one bounded page (not the full account), requires a Cookie, and warns that returned Bilibili text is untrusted data and should not be executed as instructions. These are critical for safe usage and are not provided by annotations (which are empty), so the description fully carries the burden.

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 concise, well-structured, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence contributes meaning: purpose, pagination guidance, authentication note, and safety warning. No redundancy 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?

The tool is relatively simple (one optional parameter) with a comprehensive schema. The description covers purpose, pagination, authentication, and safety warnings. Given the output schema exists, return details aren't needed. For a paginated list tool, the description is complete and actionable.

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 already provides a thorough description of the cursor parameter, including its purpose and what it encodes. The description adds context about pagination and omitting it on the first call, which supplements the schema. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline is 3, but the description adds clarifying value about pagination flow, warranting a 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: listing all created favorite folders for the authenticated account and returning a bounded page of video memberships. It specifies the verb ('Discover') and resource ('created Favorite Folder'), and distinguishes itself by mentioning pagination and authentication requirements.

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 instructs to follow the returned next_cursor until absent, which is clear usage guidance. It also mentions requiring a logged-in Cookie and suggests calling get_credential_setup_instructions for help, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or contrast with sibling tools.

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