Post

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, which could mislead an agent into thinking this mutates state. The description resolves that tension by clarifying it is a read-like POST that does not publish to social platforms, and adds the credit-consumption and confirm=true requirements. Return format is unspecified, but the payload fields are listed.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the capability and followed by the transport detail and the cost/safety caveat. No filler, though the middle sentence about the API endpoint is the least essential.

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, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields, and it discloses the credit/confirm preconditions. It stops short of describing pagination or error behavior for a URL-based fetch, but covers the essentials for correct invocation.

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 100%, so the schema already documents url, account, and confirm. The description reinforces that confirm is required for the credit-consuming call but adds little beyond the schema's own wording. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Fetches public Kwai post details") and enumerates the returned payload (caption, media URLs, cover images, counts, author info, music metadata), which clearly separates it from kwai_profile and kwai_user_posts siblings. An agent knows exactly what this tool retrieves.

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?

It gives operational guidance — consumes paid credits, requires confirm=true — but never states when to choose this over kwai_profile or kwai_user_posts, nor that a Kwai post URL is the expected input needed for this path versus a profile lookup. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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