douyin_publish_preflight

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

The annotations carry only a title, so the description must carry the behavioral burden, and it does disclose a real trait: '不打开浏览器' tells the agent no browser or login session is required and nothing is launched or published. It also lists the validation dimensions, though it does not say whether a failure blocks publishing or what the check response looks like.

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?

One front-loaded sentence states the no-browser constraint first, then uses a colon to enumerate the checks with no filler. There is nothing redundant to cut.

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 preflight validator in a multi-step publish flow, the definition covers scope and what is validated well. The remaining gap is that there is no output schema and the description does not describe the shape or meaning of a pass/fail result.

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 coverage is already 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description exceeds it by mapping checks to inputs: the files array is checked for existence, duration, resolution, audio, and size, and scheduleAt is checked for a legal time. Only 'kind' is left to the enum in the schema.

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 gives a concrete verb ('检查'/'preflight') plus the resource ('素材') and enumerates exactly what is validated: file existence, duration, resolution, audio track, size, and legality of the scheduled time. This clearly separates it from the sibling publish tools (douyin_publish_video/images), although it never names them.

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?

'先检查素材' and the preflight naming imply this step comes before an actual publish, but the description does not explicitly say 'run this before douyin_publish_video/douyin_publish_images' or state what to do when a check fails. Usage is therefore implied rather than spelled out.

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