Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• xhs_search_feedsC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full load. It only mentions 'brief information' but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, error behavior, or response structure beyond the summary. Given the presence of a login sibling, requiring authentication is likely but unstated.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no superfluous words, though it could include more detail without becoming verbose.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool has only one parameter and an output schema exists, the description is minimal. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., login), the nature of 'brief information', or how results are paginated/structured, leaving gaps in completeness.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with a description for the only parameter 'keyword'. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool searches for Xiaohongshu notes with a verb 'search' and resource 'notes', and adds 'brief information' to indicate the output scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools which are login and publish functions.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites (e.g., login required). The sibling tools are functionally distinct, but the description lacks explicit usage context.

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

• xhs_publish_noteB
  3.2/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'publish a note', omitting side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or error conditions. The parameter descriptions cover input rules but not runtime behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, short sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded with the core action.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Despite having an output schema and fully described parameters, the description lacks context on authentication, error responses, or typical usage flow. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient for an agent to use it reliably.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions (e.g., title truncation, image examples). The tool description itself adds no extra parameter semantics, meeting but not exceeding the baseline.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action '发布' (publish) and the resource '小红书图文笔记' (Xiaohongshu graphic-text note). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are about login and search, not publishing.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool, prerequisites (e.g., being logged in), or alternatives among siblings. Agents have no context for appropriate invocation.

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

• xhs_check_loginA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the return value but does not mention if the tool has side effects (likely read-only) or other behavioral traits. The description is accurate but lacks extra context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences, very concise, and front-loaded with the main purpose. No wasted words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, one return field mentioned), the description is mostly complete. Output schema exists which may provide additional detail, but the description covers the key point. Slight room to mention logged_in=False implications.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters5/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The tool has no parameters, baseline is 4. The description adds meaning beyond the input schema by interpreting the return value (logged_in=True means can publish), which is helpful for the agent.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool checks login status and relates it to publishing notes. It distinguishes from sibling tools like xhs_login (for logging in) and xhs_publish_note (for publishing).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies the tool should be used before publishing notes by stating that logged_in=True means publish is possible. However, it does not explicitly state when to use or not use alternatives.

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

• xhs_loginA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Without annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: opens browser window, requires QR code scanning, persists login state to local storage. It does not cover failure scenarios but provides sufficient transparency for a login tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Three sentences, no unnecessary words. First sentence states the core action, second clarifies when to use, third explains behavior persistence. Highly efficient.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given existence of output schema (not shown but present), the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, first-time usage, persistence, and parameter constraint. No gaps for a simple login tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100% (headless parameter explained in input schema). The main description adds no extra meaning beyond the parameter's own description, so baseline score of 3 applies.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states the tool opens browser window, scans QR code to log in to Xiaohongshu. It distinguishes from sibling tools (check_login, publish_note, search_feeds) by focusing on the login action. The phrase '首次使用必须调用' adds specificity.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly mentions '首次使用必须调用' (must be called on first use) and that after login, state is saved locally so subsequent calls are unnecessary. The parameter description adds constraint that headless must be false for login. However, no exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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