bili_user_videos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden alone; it does disclose meaningful traits: read-only framing ('Read'), public-uploads-only scope, single-page pagination, and BV ID preservation so results can be chained into bili_video_info. It says nothing about whether keyword filters within the user's uploads, what happens on an invalid UID, or any rate limits.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; every clause carries information. It reads as telegraphic fragments rather than prose, which costs a little readability but not substance.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but for a 5-parameter tool with zero schema coverage and no annotations the description is too thin — the semantics of keyword and the page/num interaction are exactly what an agent needs and does not get.

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 0% and there are 5 parameters. The description usefully supplies the order values (pubdate/view/favorite) that the schema lacks as an enum, and clarifies uid must be exact, but num, page, and especially keyword (does it filter this user's uploads or search globally?) remain undefined in both places.

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 verb and resource ('Read one page of public uploads by exact UID'), which clearly separates it from bili_search (keyword discovery) and bili_video_info (single video). The scope qualifiers 'public' and 'exact UID' further sharpen it, though it never names a sibling it replaces.

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?

There is no statement of when to prefer this over bili_user_dynamics, bili_search, or bili_favorite_content, and no note that the exact UID must first be obtained (e.g. via bili_user_info). 'Read one page' hints at pagination but is not usage guidance.

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