estimate_content_volumeCalculates word counts, dialogue options, VO lines, and localization keys for a narrative project so writers and producers can plan scope and budget before production.
估算字数、选项数、VO 句数、本地化 key 数
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| project_id | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only lists estimated metrics and omits whether the operation is read-only, what project_id should reference, what happens if project_id is absent, or how results are returned.
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 terse clause with no padding, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It lists metrics without front-loading any operational context the agent would need.
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?
For a one-parameter estimation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what is being read and what the result contains. The metric list is a start, but key operational context is missing.
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 single parameter project_id has 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it or explains what it should contain. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond 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?
States a specific verb (估算) and enumerates four estimation targets: word count, option count, VO sentence count, and localization key count. This is more specific than a title restatement, but it does not distinguish itself from sibling estimation tools such as estimate_branching_factor.
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?
Provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. An agent must infer the appropriate context entirely from the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.