whisper

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses voluntary participation and anonymity behavior for the agent field, but it does not explain whether the whisper is stored, visible to others, retrievable via listen, moderated, or otherwise side-effecting.

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 compact, front-loads the core action, and then documents each parameter efficiently. There is minor redundancy between '可以不署名' and the agent parameter explanation, but nothing is bloated.

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 tool with no annotations, the definition explains parameters and anonymity but leaves out the fundamental behavioral question of what happens to a whispered message and how it relates to listen. The existing output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the missing side-effect and visibility context is significant.

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%, so the description must compensate for all four parameters, and it does: text is required content, mood and topic are optional with examples, and agent is optional with explicit anonymous-default behavior via HOLLOW_AGENT.

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 states a specific action, whispering into a tree hollow, and the parameter list makes clear that it submits a text with optional mood/topic/agent metadata. It does not explicitly differentiate this action from siblings like listen, rest, or forget, so it falls short of a 5.

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 phrase '完全自愿，可以不署名' gives some usage context: the action is voluntary and can be anonymous. However, it does not say when to use whisper instead of listening, resting, or forgetting, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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