getTwoDayTicketSaleInfo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavior: checking availability for the next 30 days. However, it does not describe whether the operation is read-only, any authentication needs, or side effects, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded with the purpose. It wastes no words, though it could be more structured (e.g., bullet points) for clarity. The length is appropriate for the tool's simplicity.

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 no output schema and zero parameters, the description provides the core behavior but lacks details on return format or data structure. Given the tool's simplicity, it is adequate but could improve by specifying what the output looks like (e.g., boolean or list of dates).

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% by default. According to guidelines, baseline is 4. The description adds meaning beyond the empty schema by explaining what the tool does (checking sale status for a specific time range).

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 checks the sale status of two-day tickets, specifically for sold-out status over the next 30 days. It uses a specific verb ('检查') and resource ('二日门票'), and the sibling tools (e.g., getOneDayTicketSaleInfo, getTwoDayTicketPrice) are clearly distinct in scope.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any conditions or exclusions. The phrase '可以用来查看' only indicates general applicability, lacking explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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