User Posts

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

Goes beyond annotations by disclosing credit consumption, the confirm=true gate, that the read-like POST does not publish anything, and that it hits the public web API rather than scraping. These are exactly the traits (cost, auth/confirmation, side-effect safety) an agent needs and that the hints alone don't convey.

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 tight sentences, the core fetch behavior front-loaded ahead of the cost/confirmation constraints. No filler.

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 compensates by naming the returned fields and the next-cursor pagination model, and it flags the credit/confirm requirements. Slightly short of complete because it omits any guidance on required vs optional inputs (e.g. url or handle).

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/count/cursor/account/confirm. The description only reinforces confirm=true and cursor-based paging, so 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?

Specific verb (fetches) plus resource (paginated list of public Kwai posts for a user), with the returned fields enumerated. An agent can distinguish it from kwai_profile and kwai_post from the text alone.

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?

Gives clear operational context: uses the public web API rather than HTML scraping, requires confirm=true, and consumes paid credits. It does not, however, explicitly say when to prefer this over the sibling kwai_profile or kwai_post, so routing still needs inference.

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