it_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. It mentions '实时数据' (real-time data) and '热榜' (hot list), hinting at dynamic, trending content, but fails to disclose critical behaviors such as data freshness, rate limits, authentication needs, or output format. The description is too brief to provide meaningful behavioral context beyond a basic category.

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 concise ('实时数据/IT资讯热榜'), but this brevity leads to under-specification rather than efficiency. It is front-loaded with the key terms, but the single phrase fails to provide adequate information, making it feel incomplete rather than optimally structured.

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 implied by real-time data and hot lists, along with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the tool returns, how the data is sourced or ranked, or any operational constraints. For a tool that likely involves dynamic data fetching, more context is needed to be 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, and schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description does not add parameter semantics, but this is acceptable given the lack of parameters. A baseline score of 4 is appropriate as the description does not need to compensate for any parameter gaps.

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/IT资讯热榜' is vague and tautological. It restates the tool name 'it_news' in Chinese ('IT资讯热榜' means 'IT news hot list'), providing only a general category without specifying what action the tool performs (e.g., 'fetch', 'list', 'search'). It does not clearly distinguish from sibling tools like 'zhihu_news' or 'weibo_news' beyond the 'IT' focus.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With 16 sibling tools all appearing to be news-related (e.g., 'zhihu_news', 'weibo_news'), there is no indication of what makes 'it_news' unique—whether it's for real-time IT news, specific sources, or other contexts. No explicit or implied usage instructions are present.

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