get_36kr_trending

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It fails to mention that the operation is read-only, states no authentication requirements, rate limits, or output format. The description is vague about what 'provides' means in terms of data returned or side effects.

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 sentence, but it packs multiple content categories making it slightly verbose. It front-loads the action '获取 36 氪热榜' but the rest could be trimmed. Still, it is efficient and avoids 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 simple read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the content scope but lacks behavioral details (e.g., read-only, pagination, output format). It is adequate for its complexity but not fully 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 input schema already fully describes the single parameter 'type' with four enum values and their descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score 3 is appropriate.

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 fetches a hot list from 36kr, covering entrepreneurship, business, and tech news, including specific content categories like investment trends and industry analysis. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_bbc_news or get_zhihu_trending by focusing on Chinese startup and business content.

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 implies usage for obtaining Chinese tech/business trending, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_weibo_trending, get_zhihu_trending). No when-not or alternative guidance is provided, leaving it to the agent to infer context.

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