get_home_timeline

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. It describes the API call, the data retrieval nature, and provides detailed output structure including HTML formats, mentions of reposts, topics, and audit status. It implicitly indicates it's a read operation. However, it does not explicitly state authorization requirements or rate limits, which would further enhance transparency.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, an API reference, a usage note, and a detailed returns section with bullet points. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. Could be slightly more concise, but no unnecessary sentences.

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?

Given that the tool has a detailed output schema described in the returns section and the two parameters are fully explained, the description is complete for this simple read tool. It also addresses an edge case (user referring to 'my fanfou'). The lack of error handling or rate limit information is acceptable for a basic read operation.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining both parameters: 'count: 获取数量，默认 5 条' and 'max_id: 返回列表中内容最新 ID，用于分页获取更早的内容'. This adds meaning beyond the schema's title and default values.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves the home timeline of the current user's followed users, and distinguishes it from a specific user's timeline. It references the API endpoint and provides context that normally when users say 'my fanfou', this tool applies, differentiating it from sibling tools like get_user_timeline and get_public_timeline.

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 description includes explicit guidance on when to use this tool: '通常用户询问「我的饭否」时，指的是该时间线，除非用户明确指出「某个用户的饭否」'. This helps the agent decide between home timeline and specific user timelines. However, it does not explicitly list all alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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