bilibili_live_rooms

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond them: no word on pagination behavior, result caps (page_size max 30, page max 1000), or whether an empty area returns empty results or errors.

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 clause with zero padding, which is good structure. But the brevity crosses into under-specification rather than conciseness — it spends one sentence where three or four pieces of information are needed.

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?

With 5 undocumented parameters, no output schema, and a sibling (bilibili_live_areas) that clearly supplies the required area identifiers, the description should explain the area-id workflow and pagination. It supplies almost none of that, so an agent cannot confidently construct a correct call from the definition alone.

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% across 5 parameters, so the description carries the full burden, yet it only implies the area-based filter. page, page_size, sort_type (enum online/live_time), and the parent_area_id vs area_id distinction are left completely unexplained.

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 names a specific verb (读取) and resource (直播间列表) with a scoping filter (按直播分区), so an agent knows exactly what it returns. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like bilibili_live_areas or bilibili_live_room_info, which is the remaining requirement for a 5.

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 use this tool versus bilibili_live_areas (to discover areas) or bilibili_live_room_info (single room). A genuinely useful note — that parent_area_id must come from bilibili_live_areas — is absent, leaving usage to inference.

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