rebuild_communities

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

The description discloses the key behavioral trait of being destructive ('清除...并重新构建'), which is critical. However, no annotations exist, and the description does not elaborate on other behaviors like idempotency or prerequisites. It provides basic but sufficient transparency.

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 highly concise: one line for purpose, followed by a clear Args section with parameter explanations. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return value ('新社区列表'). It is nearly complete for agent usage, though lacking usage context (when to use vs siblings) which is partially addressed elsewhere.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining each parameter: level ('macro' or 'micro'), min_df (minimum document frequency), and resolution (Leiden resolution). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type/defaults.

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's purpose: '清除指定层级的旧社区并重新构建' (clear old communities at a specified level and rebuild). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'build_communities_v1' by emphasizing the destructive rebuild aspect.

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 rebuilding communities at a given level but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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