get_account_info

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return payload (nickname, ID, level) and the fact that identity is tied to the bound Cookie, but it says nothing about what happens when no valid Cookie is present (error vs. empty result) — a likely failure mode for this call.

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?

Two short sentences: the first defines the operation and its payload, the second gives the motive. Nothing is padded and the core purpose is front-loaded.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description does the work of naming the returned fields and the precondition (a bound Cookie). Only the unauthenticated/failed-cookie behavior is omitted, which is a modest gap for a zero-parameter read tool.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; this is the baseline-correct score. The description correctly implies no input is required by framing the call around the ambient Cookie state.

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 ('获取当前番茄作家账号信息') and enumerates the returned fields (昵称、ID、等级), so an agent knows exactly what it gets. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like get_author_overview or check_login, which is the only gap.

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?

The second sentence gives a concrete when-to-use: verifying which account a Cookie is bound to. No explicit when-not-to-use or named alternative (e.g. check_login) is offered, so it falls short of a 5.

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