get_status_info

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It details return fields and formats, but lacks disclosure about authentication, rate limits, or side effects. Read-only nature implied but not stated.

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?

Description is detailed, especially the returns section, which is justified for complex data. However, it could be more structured (e.g., bullet points) and slightly shorter.

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 the single parameter and presence of output schema, the description compensates by detailing the return dictionary. It covers expected fields and special cases (e.g., retweets, audits), making it complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

Parameter status_id is described as '饭否内容的 ID', which adds meaning beyond the schema (only title and type). With 0% schema coverage, this is valuable.

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 it retrieves detailed information about a specific Fanfou status, specifying the API endpoint and distinguishing it from sibling tools that deal with timelines or user info.

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?

Purpose is implied: use when you need details of a known status ID. No explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with alternatives like get_home_timeline.

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