用户信息

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by naming the returned fields (card info, level, follower count, following count), which matters since there is no output schema. It still omits error behavior for invalid/private UIDs.

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 compact sentence with the action and the returned fields front-loaded. No wasted text, though it is terse enough that it provides no structure beyond the one clause.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the key information an agent needs: what entity it targets and what fields come back. Only routing guidance relative to the many sibling tools is absent.

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% and the single 'mid' parameter is documented as '用户 UID' in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or sourcing detail for mid, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('获取...用户的名片信息') and enumerates the data returned (等级、粉丝数、关注数), so an agent knows it retrieves a user profile. It does not explicitly contrast itself with neighbours like list_followers/list_followings, but the resource focus on a single user's card is clear.

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 versus list_followers, list_followings, user_videos or other user-related siblings. Usage must be inferred entirely from the one-line purpose.

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