get_friend_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and 'Get friend list' reveals nothing: no return format, no authentication requirements, no pagination or limits, not even a confirmation that it returns the calling user's own friends.

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?

Three words is brief, but this is under-specification rather than efficient conciseness. No information is conveyed beyond the tool's own name, so the description cannot be said to earn its place.

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?

While the zero-parameter input makes the call signature trivial, there is no output schema and no annotations, so the description should at least indicate what the tool returns (friend IDs, nicknames, pagination). It does not, leaving the agent to guess the response shape.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is trivially 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameters. The 0-parameter baseline of 4 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 'Get friend list' restates the tool name almost verbatim, making it essentially a tautology. It names a verb and resource but adds no detail that distinguishes it from siblings like get_group_list or get_stranger_info.

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?

No usage guidance is provided whatsoever. There is no statement of when to use this tool, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as get_stranger_info or get_friend_msg_history, despite several closely related sibling tools.

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