net_keyword_density

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavior: crawling a page and counting keyword occurrences/density. However, it omits potential behavioral traits such as handling of JavaScript-rendered content, rate limits, robots.txt compliance, or how 'density' is calculated. The description is transparent but not deeply revealing of edge cases.

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?

The description is a single, compact sentence (16 Chinese characters) that leads with the tool's purpose and immediately explains the action. No filler or redundancy; every word earns 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?

For a web-crawling tool with no output schema or annotations, the description gives the essential function but lacks details on return format, error conditions, or special cases. It implicitly mentions output ('出现次数与密度') but does not specify structure. Given the tool's simplicity, it is adequate yet leaves room for improvement in operational context.

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%, so the description must compensate. It maps 'url' to '页面' (page) and 'keyword' to '指定关键词' (specified keyword), adding basic meaning beyond the raw schema. However, it does not clarify matching rules (e.g., case sensitivity, exact phrase) or what 'density' means numerically, leaving some ambiguity for the two parameters.

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 clearly states the tool's function: '网页关键词密度检测' (webpage keyword density detection) and specifies the action '抓取页面统计指定关键词出现次数与密度' (crawl page, count occurrences and density of specified keyword). It distinguishes itself from siblings like net_fetch and net_meta_analyze by focusing on keyword density, a unique resource+action combination.

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?

The description implies usage (when you need keyword density for a page) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no prerequisites. Sibling tools like net_meta_analyze or net_fetch are not mentioned, so the agent has no basis for comparative selection.

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