Retrieve cultural tourism Douyin trending posts by keyword and date, ranked by likes. Data updates daily at 15:00 for the prior day; verify if no data exists.
文旅抖音信息源查询：按关键词与日期获取文旅类抖音热门作品(点赞量排序)。数据每日15:00更新前一天，无数据日期必须确认后再查
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | No | 数据日期 YYYY-MM-DD（默认最近数据日） | |
| count | No | 最大返回条数 1-200（默认100） | |
| keyword | No | 内容关键词，如 文旅、景区、旅游攻略（留空返回全部） |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
v1.0.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the disclosure burden. It discloses useful behavior: results are sorted by likes, data has a daily 15:00 update lag for the previous day, and missing data requires confirmation. It does not detail return fields or side effects, but "查询" and the listed behavior make the read-only nature reasonably clear.
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 two short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the update/missing-data caveat kept to one compact clause. Every part earns its place.
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 read-oriented feed query with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description supplies key context: what is returned ("热门作品"), ordering ("点赞量排序"), freshness ("每日15:00更新前一天"), and a missing-data caution. Its only notable gap is not clarifying what the "确认后再查" confirmation process entails.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description echoes keyword and date concepts but adds no meaning beyond the schema, and it does not explain the count parameter. This is acceptable because the schema already documents all three parameters with defaults and limits.
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 names a specific resource ("文旅抖音信息源") and a concrete action ("获取文旅类抖音热门作品"), and adds a sorting behavior ("点赞量排序"). Even without naming siblings, the 文旅/Douyin scope clearly separates it from other platform feeds and generic Douyin hot-topic tools.
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?
It establishes a clear usage context: query by keyword and date for cultural-tourism Douyin hot content. It also gives operational timing ("数据每日15:00更新前一天") and a caution about missing dates ("无数据日期必须确认后再查"), though it does not explicitly enumerate sibling alternatives or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.