搜索视频/用户

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and openness profile is covered. The description adds that video results carry BV id, link, author, and tags, which is useful since there is no output schema, but it says nothing about pagination behavior, rate limits, or empty-result handling.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence covering purpose followed by result content, with no filler. It is slightly terse given the tool's filtering and sorting options, but nothing is wasted.

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 5-parameter read-only search with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose and sketches the return fields. Missing are routing hints against sibling list/info tools and any pagination notes, but the essentials for calling it correctly are present.

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%, so page, type, limit, order, and keyword are all documented in the schema itself. The description only echoes the video/user distinction and result fields, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the structured data; baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: keyword search over Bilibili videos or users, and names the two searchable entity types. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like video_info, user_info, or popular_list, though it does not explicitly say it differs from those list/ranking tools.

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 guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives such as popular_list, rank_list, or video_info, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the mention of two search types, leaving the agent to infer routing.

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