list_realtime_map

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

注释已提供readOnlyHint、idempotentHint和destructiveHint。描述额外揭示了API端过滤和30秒缓存，提供了超越注释的行为上下文。未发现矛盾。

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?

描述简洁，包含表情和明确的参数、返回、提示部分。每个句子都有价值，结构合理。

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?

鉴于只有一个参数、无输出模式、注释充分，描述提供了目的、参数、返回和缓存行为，足够完整。兄弟工具数量较多但未造成混淆。

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?

输入模式已覆盖100%的参数字段，描述对参数仅重复了示例，未增加超出模式的额外语义。基线为3。

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?

描述明确使用动词"获取"和资源"实时位置快照"，并指定是给定地图上的所有标签。与兄弟工具如list_tags（仅列出标签）、get_tag_location（单一标签位置）区分清晰。

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?

描述了必要的参数mapCode，并提示了过滤和缓存行为，但没有明确说明何时使用此工具与替代方案（如get_tag_location或list_tags），也没有排除条件。

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