weibo-hot-search

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only query through '查询', but it does not state what kind of data is returned, whether the list is current/historical, or what limitations exist. This is minimal behavioral signal, not substantive 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 very short and has no wasted words, which is good. However, it is barely more than a restatement of the tool name and is underspecified as a usage explanation, so its brevity comes at the cost of informative content.

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 no-parameter tool, invocation may be trivial, but the description does not explain what the output is or how this differs from weibo-realtime-search. Without an output schema or annotations, '微博热搜榜查询' is too thin for an agent to confidently select and interpret the result of this tool over similar Weibo-related siblings.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is effectively complete, so there are no parameter semantics the description needs to clarify. With 0 params, the baseline is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any schema gaps.

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 '微博热搜榜查询' clearly identifies the verb (查询/query) and resource (微博热搜榜/Weibo hot search ranking). It is understandable on its own, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling weibo-realtime-search, which could plausibly cover similar ground.

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 given about when to use this tool instead of related siblings such as weibo-realtime-search, weibo-post-search, or weibo-comment-search. The description simply states what the tool does without offering selection criteria or exclusions.

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