zsxq_topics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: pure HTTP/REST API, no shared state, concurrency safe, and cookie-based authentication. However, it does not address potential errors, rate limits, or read-only nature explicitly.

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 with clear line breaks separating purpose, technical details, and safety note. Every sentence adds value, and the most important information (purpose) is front-loaded.

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 has an output schema (not shown) and 3 parameters fully described, the description covers the basics (purpose, technical requirements, concurrency). However, it lacks details on pagination, error handling, or what happens with invalid group IDs, which is expected for a scraping tool.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 applies. The description adds no new parameter-level information; it only provides context on cookie authentication which is outside parameter semantics.

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 it retrieves the latest posts from ZSXQ paid community with a specific verb ('获取'). It distinguishes from the sibling 'zsxq_article' by name, but does not explicitly compare usage contexts.

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 provides environment details (cookie file, concurrency safety) but lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'zsxq_article', or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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