huxiu_news

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions '实时数据' (real-time data), implying freshness and possible rate limits or update frequency, but doesn't specify details like authentication needs, data format, or any constraints. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate, as it lacks critical behavioral traits.

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 concise ('实时数据/虎嗅热榜'), consisting of a short phrase that front-loads key info (real-time data, Huxiu hot list). It earns its place by conveying the core purpose efficiently, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating concepts). No waste, so it scores high.

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 (a news data tool with real-time aspects), no annotations, no output schema, and 0 parameters, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the output includes (e.g., article titles, links, rankings) or behavioral details, leaving significant gaps for an agent to use it effectively. This falls short of being adequately complete.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so no parameters need documentation. The description doesn't add param info, but with zero params, the baseline is 4, as there's nothing to compensate for. This is appropriate given the lack of inputs.

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 '实时数据/虎嗅热榜' states the tool provides real-time data from Huxiu's hot list, which gives a vague purpose (verb+resource). However, it doesn't clearly differentiate from siblings like '36ke_news' or 'zhihu_news' beyond the source name, lacking specificity about what 'hot list' entails (e.g., trending articles, rankings). This meets the minimum viable level but has gaps in clarity.

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. The description doesn't mention any context, exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools (e.g., use for Huxiu-specific content vs. other news sources). This leaves the agent without direction on selection, scoring low as it offers no usage advice.

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