实时数据/微博热搜

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails completely. It doesn't indicate whether this is a read operation, whether it requires authentication, what format the data comes in, whether there are rate limits, or any other behavioral characteristics. The description provides zero behavioral information.

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 technically concise (just the tool name repeated), this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. A truly concise description would efficiently convey purpose and usage in minimal words, but this provides no useful information beyond the name. Every sentence should earn its place, and this 'description' doesn't earn any place at all.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and a description that merely repeats the tool name, this is completely inadequate. For a tool that presumably returns real-time Weibo hot search data, the description should at minimum explain what data is returned, how it's structured, and when to use it versus sibling tools. The current description provides none of this essential context.

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 score is 4. The description doesn't need to compensate for any parameter documentation gaps since there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't add parameter information, but none is needed.

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 on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., 实时数据/知乎热榜, 实时数据/抖音热榜). There's no indication of what distinguishes Weibo hot search data from other platform hot searches, nor any context about appropriate use cases or limitations.

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