bilibili_user_get_followers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It adds a meaningful constraint: '非自己只能查看前5页' (non-own can only view first 5 pages), which is valuable. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention authentication or rate limits, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 and well-structured with clear 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. Every line provides essential info: parameter explanations and a critical limitation. No redundant or filler content.

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 description covers parameters and a key usage constraint (5-page limit). Since there is no output schema, the return description '粉丝列表' is somewhat vague but sufficient for a simple list tool. It could benefit from specifying the return structure, but overall it is complete enough for a tool of this complexity.

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 no descriptions for the parameters (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It explains all four parameters: uid, page_num, page_size, and order, including the meaning of order ('desc-倒序, asc-正序'). This adds useful semantics beyond the bare schema.

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 purpose with a specific verb and resource: '获取用户粉丝列表' (Get user follower list). It is easy to distinguish from the sibling tool bilibili_user_get_followings based on the word '粉丝' (followers), even though the description does not explicitly mention the alternative.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only provides parameters and a limitation note but does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or when to choose another tool. The usage context is entirely implicit.

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