Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• search_videosB
  3.1/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention pagination behavior, result ordering, authentication, rate limits, or what is included in the results. The schema hints at page/count but the description itself adds no behavioral context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler, making it highly concise. However, it is so terse that it omits useful context, though it still earns its place.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the lack of output schema and annotations, and the description's brevity, the agent is left without crucial context such as return structure, pagination limits, edge cases, or conflict with siblings. The schema covers parameters but the description does not round out the tool's behavior.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100% with self-explanatory fields (keyword, page, count). The description adds no information beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: searching for videos on Bilibili. The verb 'search' distinguishes it from sibling tools get_user_info and get_video_info, which are direct lookups, and it specifies the resource and platform.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools, nor any circumstances that would make it the preferred choice. It only states the basic functionality without any context or exclusions.

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

• get_video_infoB
  3.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention the return format, what fields constitute 'detailed information,' or any potential side effects (though 'get' implies read-only). It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the verb.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately minimal for a simple getter tool.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  This tool has no output schema and no annotations, requiring the description to explain what return values to expect. The description only says 'detailed information' without specifying any fields or structure, leaving the agent with insufficient understanding of the output. Given the availability of sibling tools, it also doesn't clarify how this differs in output or use case.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema already fully documents the only parameter (bvid) with a description, achieving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics such as format examples or constraints, so it performs at the baseline.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a Bilibili video'). It distinguishes from siblings by the resource type (video vs user/search), making its purpose clear.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus get_user_info or search_videos. Usage is only implied by the name and description: if you have a known BVID. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are given.

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

• get_user_infoA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only operation through the verb 'Get', but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as error handling, rate limits, or return format. This is a neutral score because it is not misleading, but it adds minimal behavioral context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action and resource, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequately complete. It states the core purpose clearly, and while it could mention what specific information is returned, this is not critical for a basic user-info lookup.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameter 'mid' is fully documented in the schema as 'User's numeric ID'. The description does not add any additional semantic context beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('information about a Bilibili user'). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like get_video_info and search_videos, which target different resource types.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description clearly implies when to use the tool: whenever you need information about a specific user. It provides clear context for usage, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. For a simple lookup tool, this is sufficient.

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