get_user_character_collection_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the tool is clearly a safe read operation. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., auth needs, rate limits, or data details). The output schema may cover return values, so no deduction.

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 exceptionally concise: a single, front-loaded phrase with no wasted words. Every word contributes to the purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 simple params), presence of output schema, and robust annotations, the description is largely complete. It could mention return data nature, but the output schema fills that gap. The sibling context also helps disambiguate usage.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions ('用户名/ID', '角色ID'). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, and schema coverage is 100%, achieving the baseline of 3.

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 '获取用户指定角色收藏信息' clearly states the action (get), the resource (user's character collection info), and the specificity (for a specified character). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_user_character_collections' which likely returns all collections.

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 this tool is for a single character via '指定角色', but no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like 'get_user_character_collections' is provided. Context from sibling names helps, but the description itself lacks explicit usage direction.

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