qzone_visitors

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 indicates a read operation but does not explain return shape, ordering of 'recent', pagination behavior, authentication requirements, or whether any side effects occur. This leaves an agent without important expectations beyond the one-line summary.

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 short sentence with no filler, and the core action and resource are front-loaded. It is concise and easy to parse, though it may be too terse to carry the behavioral and parameter information an agent would benefit from.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description itself must provide enough context, but it only states that recent visitors are read. Missing response format, pagination semantics, and any session or permission context make it incomplete for a robust agent decision, even though the tool can be invoked with defaults.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning for the 'page' or 'count' parameters beyond what their names and defaults already imply. It doesn't explain how pagination works, what each value controls, or what ranges are valid.

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 uses a specific verb ('读取') and a clear resource ('当前 QQ 空间最近访客'), uniquely identifying a visitor-retrieval operation. This is distinct from sibling tools focused on posts, publishing, likes, comments, and deletion, so an agent can tell them apart without opening the schema.

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 versus alternatives, nor are any exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. The read intent is implied by the verb, but the description doesn't say when an agent should choose this over sibling QZone tools.

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