Get authorized Bilibili user statistics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the USER_DATA scope requirement and clarifies that it reads the authorized user's stats, which are valuable behavioral details beyond annotations.

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 two sentences with the first sentence front-loading the verb and output metrics, and the second adding essential auth context. No filler or redundant content.

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 simple read-only tool with no output schema, the description lists the returned metrics and auth requirement, which is largely sufficient. It doesn't explicitly mention response_format behavior, but the schema covers that, and annotations handle safety and idempotency.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single response_format parameter, so baseline 3 applies. The tool description doesn't add parameter-specific detail, but the schema already clearly explains the allowed values and defaults.

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?

Description uses a specific verb 'Get' and names the exact metrics: following, follower, and approved-video counts. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like bilibili_get_video_stats by specifying 'authorized user' and the official Open Platform.

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?

States the tool operates on the authorized user and requires USER_DATA scope, providing a clear prerequisite and context. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the 'authorized user' qualifier implies when this tool is appropriate versus other Bilibili tools.

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