ecomm_review

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

Annotations are absent, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or data consumption. The only additional information is the cost and API endpoint, which does not aid in understanding the tool's operations.

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 very short but includes extraneous information (pricing, API URL) that is not directly functional. It lacks structure and does not front-load the purpose.

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?

Given the complexity of the tool (querying product reviews) and the presence of sibling tools, the description fails to clarify what the tool returns. There is no output schema or indication of result format, making it incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters, but the description adds no further meaning. There is a contradiction: the parameter 'limit' is described as optional in the description ('条数(可选)') but marked as required in the schema, which could confuse the agent.

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 says '商品评论查询' (product review query) but is mostly in Chinese and does not state the action clearly in English. It lacks a verb and resource specification, and does not distinguish from sibling tools ecomm_product or ecomm_search.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ecomm_product or ecomm_search. The description only includes pricing and an API URL, offering no context for selection.

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