social_weibo

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions pricing and an API endpoint, but says nothing about what the tool does (e.g., search, retrieve user data), authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects.

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 extremely short but lacks substance. It fails to provide necessary context, making it under-specified rather than efficiently concise. Every sentence should earn its place; here, the sentences about pricing and API are useful but insufficient.

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 tool's complexity (one parameter, no output schema) and its place among many social tools, the description is critically incomplete. It does not explain what type of data is returned or how the agent should interpret results. An agent would struggle to use this tool correctly.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a single 'query' parameter described in Chinese. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score 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?

The description identifies the platform (Weibo) and mentions 'data', implying retrieval. However, it does not specify the action (search, get, etc.) or what kind of data is returned. It is distinguishable from siblings only by platform name.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over other social tools (e.g., social_twitter) or what context is appropriate. Only the platform name and pricing are given.

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