bilibili-portfolio-search

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

没有提供注解，描述承担了完全的行为披露责任。它仅说明'查询'，未提及分页、返回的元数据类型、认证要求、速率限制或可能的失败模式。对于只读操作，除'查询'外没有更丰富的上下文。

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?

描述是单句话，没有冗余或填充内容。核心功能被直接且前置地传达。每一部分都有价值，没有浪费的上下文。

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?

对于只有1个必填参数且无输出模式的简单工具，描述提供了最低限度的可操作性，说明了会返回作品列表，但未说明列表项的结构。由于复杂度低，这个缺口可以容忍，但若补充输出字段信息会更好。

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?

输入模式已完全描述了uid参数（'B站用户UID'），覆盖率为100%。描述没有为uid增加额外语义，如格式、获取方式或约束。根据规则，当模式覆盖率高且描述未添加超越模式的信息时，基线得分为3是合适的。

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?

描述'B站用户作品列表查询'明确了一个特定的操作（查询）和资源（B站用户的作品列表）。'用户'和'作品列表'的组合使其与兄弟工具如bilibili-search-download和bilibili-comment清晰区分。尽管简短，但它唯一地定义了工具的功能。

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?

描述没有提供任何关于何时使用此工具而非替代方案的指导，例如与bilibili-search-download或bilibili-video-downloader的区别。没有排除条件、前提条件或选择偏好。Agent无法根据描述决定在哪些场景下优先使用此工具。

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