getMapPlayerBehavior

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it does not explain what data is returned, how 'behavior' is defined, or any operational details such as pagination or rate limits. It only repeats parameter requirements, leaving the tool's behavior opaque.

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 concise sentence, making it easy to parse. However, this brevity leaves out critical context and behavioral details, so while it is efficient, it is under-specified for the tool's complexity.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description has a responsibility to indicate what the tool returns; it does not. With five required parameters and no explanation of the result or the meaning of 'behavior', the description is incomplete for effective 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, providing definitions for all five parameters with examples. The description merely restates that Token, userAgent, and mapId are required, adding no new semantics beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 states the tool '获取神岛平台用户地图玩家行为' (gets user map player behavior on Shendao platform), which identifies a specific verb and resource. However, 'behavior' is vague and not distinguished from sibling tools like getMapPlayerStatList or getMapPlayerRetention, so it lacks differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only lists authentication requirements (Token, userAgent, mapId) without any contextual usage or exclusions, so the agent receives no decision support.

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