movie_boxoffice_realtime

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the data source URL and return type (pandas.DataFrame), which is valuable, but it doesn't disclose data freshness, possible delays, or how the data is scoped. No contradiction with annotations.

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 front-loaded, containing only the title, source URL, return data description, and return type. It's efficient, though slightly fragmentary due to the `:return:` style instead of a full sentence.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description should explain what the returned DataFrame contains, but it only says '实时票房数据' (realtime box office data) without listing columns or data granularity. However, it's a simple zero-parameter read-only tool, and the name and URL provide context, making it minimally adequate.

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 100%, so the baseline per rubric is 4. The description adds nothing parameter-related, but none is needed.

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 it returns real-time box office data (实时票房数据) and points to the source URL, which clearly identifies the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from siblings like movie_boxoffice_daily by the 'realtime' qualifier, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve'.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus the many other movie box office tools (daily, weekly, monthly, etc.). There is no mention of alternatives, prerequisites, or caveats about data availability.

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