Retrieve video lists from a Bilibili collection or series by providing the uploader's mid and either season_id or series_id to filter the results.
合集（season_id）或系列（series_id）内的视频列表，二选一。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mid | Yes | ||
| page | No | ||
| season_id | No | ||
| series_id | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the constraint that exactly one of season_id/series_id must be chosen, but it does not state whether the operation is read-only, how pagination behaves, what happens if both are provided, or any authentication/rate-limit considerations.
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 with no wasted words, and the core either/or constraint is front-loaded. However, its extreme brevity sacrifices necessary detail, making it more under-specified than genuinely concise.
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?
With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, a brief purpose statement is insufficient. The description fails to clarify the role of mid, the meaning of page, or the behavior when both season_id and series_id are set. An agent would struggle to invoke this tool correctly without additional schema documentation.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains season_id and series_id as the collection/series identifiers which are mutually exclusive, but it does not explain the meaning of the required parameter mid or the page parameter. This is a significant gap given that mid is required by the 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 states a specific action ('list videos') and resource ('within a collection (season_id) or series (series_id)'), and explicitly notes the either/or requirement. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_uploader_videos, which lists all videos by an uploader, and list_uploader_collections, which lists collections rather than their contents.
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 the use case — when you have a specific season_id or series_id — but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it. No mention of prerequisites such as the uploader identity (mid) or when to prefer a sibling tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.