patent_bigdata_patent_stats

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The brief description only mentions 'statistics' without further details.

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 and includes parameter definitions in a structured list. However, the main purpose statement is minimal and could be front-loaded with more detail to improve clarity.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the statistical analysis returns (e.g., counts, trends), nor does it mention any constraints or prerequisites. The tool's purpose is implied but not fully conveyed.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explicitly lists the two parameters and provides examples for keywordType (name, nameId, regNumber, socialCreditCode) and explains matchKeyword as enterprise name/ID. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's bare titles.

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 '企业专利统计分析' (enterprise patent statistical analysis), giving a general verb and resource. However, it lacks specificity about what kind of statistics (e.g., counts, trends) and does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'patent_bigdata_patent_search' which likely lists patents.

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 like 'patent_bigdata_patent_search' or other enterprise tools. The description does not mention any prerequisites or context for usage.

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