follow_topic_live

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden — and it does real work: it discloses the asynchronous timing (results appear only after the live ends and is AI-processed), the required topic.live.write scope, and the current input platform limitation. It omits idempotency and behavior when the live is already subscribed or already processing.

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?

Four short sentences, each carrying distinct information — action, downstream visibility, input limitation, required scope — with the core action front-loaded. Nothing is redundant.

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 2-parameter write tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential agent needs: what it does, when results are observable, the platform restriction, and the auth scope. Only failure/duplicate handling is left unspecified.

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 both link and topic_id are already documented in the schema. The description only reinforces the link constraint (仅支持得到 App 直播链接) without adding format or ID-resolution guidance, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource: subscribing a Dedao App live stream into a knowledge base (订阅...直播到知识库), and names the sibling list_topic_lives as the read counterpart. It cleanly separates subscribe (write) from view (read), though it does not say how it differs from the adjacent follow_topic_blogger tool.

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?

Gives clear context for when the effect becomes visible (直播结束后经 AI 处理 — after the live ends and AI processing completes, use list_topic_lives), and states the input constraint that only Dedao App live links are accepted. It does not spell out explicit exclusions or what happens on duplicate subscriptions.

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