Profile

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that calls may consume paid API credits, that confirm=true is required, that it hits Kwai's public web API rather than scraping HTML, and that the read-like POST does not publish to social platforms. That last point usefully resolves the tension with readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false.

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 purpose, then implementation, then the operational constraints (credits, confirm, no publishing). Tight, though the 'not HTML scraping' clause is minor color rather than essential information.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description appropriately enumerates returned fields and adds the credit/confirm constraints an agent needs before calling. It leaves return shape details and error/rate-limit behavior unstated, but the core picture is complete for a profile-read tool.

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, handle, account, and confirm with clear semantics. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the structured fields provide, so baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb ('Fetches') and resource ('public Kwai profile data') and enumerates the returned fields (username, bio, avatar, verification, gender, counts), which clearly separates it from kwai_user_posts and kwai_post. It does not, however, explicitly name a sibling or scope boundary, so differentiation rests on the name plus field list.

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?

Usage is implied: supply url or handle to retrieve a profile. There is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusions, and no routing to alternatives such as kwai_user_posts or kwai_post among ~130 siblings, so the agent must infer the choice.

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