实时数据/搜狗热榜

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

No annotations are provided, and the description offers zero behavioral information. It doesn't indicate whether this is a read-only operation, what kind of data it returns, whether there are rate limits, authentication requirements, or any other behavioral characteristics. The description carries the full burden of disclosure and completely fails to meet it.

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?

While the description is extremely brief, this represents under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The single phrase doesn't provide enough information to be useful, so it's not earning its place through efficient communication but rather through omission of necessary details.

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 that this is a data retrieval tool with no annotations, no output schema, and many similar sibling tools, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what data is returned, how it's formatted, what time period it covers, or how it differs from other hot list tools. The description fails to provide the minimal context needed for an agent to understand and use this tool 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?

The tool has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, as there's no parameter information that needs to be conveyed beyond what the schema already indicates (no 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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 absolutely no guidance about when to use this tool versus its many sibling tools. With 16 similar-looking 'hot list' tools available, the description fails to indicate what makes the Sogou hot list unique or when it would be the appropriate choice among alternatives.

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