bili_browse_state

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that this reads local recent state and is not durable memory or watch proof. It does not state permissions, side effects, or other behavioral constraints beyond that scope caveat.

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?

Two tight sentences with no waste; the scope and caveat are front-loaded and useful.

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?

The output schema exists, so return-value details need not be repeated. However, for a read tool with two undocumented parameters and no annotations, the description leaves important invocation details such as limit/cursor behavior unstated.

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 schema has two parameters, limit and cursor, with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain either one. 'Recent' loosely implies a bounded result set, but cursor pagination is not addressed.

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?

States a specific read operation and resource: recent local discovery refs plus seen/selected/skipped and part/time positions. It is distinguishable from long-term memory, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as bili_browse_advance or bili_discover.

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 implies usage by calling this navigation state and ruling out long-term memory or proof of watching. It gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus the related browse/discover siblings.

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