zhihu_news

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. '实时数据' (real-time data) suggests freshness but doesn't specify update frequency, rate limits, or data format. '知乎热榜' (Zhihu hot list) indicates content type but doesn't describe what 'hot' means (views, upvotes, comments) or how results are structured. No authentication requirements or potential side effects are mentioned.

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 at just two Chinese phrases. While brief, it's front-loaded with the essential information - real-time data from Zhihu's trending content. There's no wasted space, though some might argue it's too terse for a tool with no annotations or output schema to provide additional context.

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 has no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameters, the description should provide more complete context. While it states what platform and type of data, it doesn't describe the return format, data freshness guarantees, sorting methodology, or any limitations. For a tool in a crowded namespace with 15 similar siblings, more differentiation would be helpful.

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 zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist. The schema fully documents the empty parameter set, and the description correctly focuses on the tool's purpose rather than non-existent parameters.

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/知乎热榜' translates to 'real-time data/Zhihu hot list' which indicates it provides trending content from Zhihu. However, it's somewhat vague about the exact operation - it doesn't specify if this fetches, lists, or streams the data. The description distinguishes from siblings by specifying the Zhihu platform, but lacks a clear action verb.

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 the 15 other news/social media tools in the sibling list. There's no indication of what makes Zhihu data unique, when it's most relevant, or any prerequisites for usage. The user must infer usage from the platform name alone.

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