set_member_card

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

The description discloses that an empty string clears the card, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention side effects, permission requirements, or idempotency, and no annotations are provided to supplement.

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 extremely concise: one line of purpose followed by a bullet list of arguments. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity and lack of annotations or output schema, the description adequately covers the core functionality. It explains the parameters and the special meaning of an empty string, making it complete for typical use.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining each parameter: '群号' for group_id, '目标 QQ 号' for user_id, and for card, it clarifies that an empty string means clear. This compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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's purpose: '设置群成员名片（群昵称）' (set group member card/nickname). The verb 'set' and specific resource 'group member card' make it distinct from sibling tools like mute_member or kick_member.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or scenarios where it should not be used. It simply states the action without context.

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