查询多平台热榜

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds relevant behavioral context: it preserves per-platform rank and heat, detects cross-platform similar topics, and warns that heat values are only comparable within the same platform. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 compact and front-loaded, with two sentences that each add useful information: what platforms are covered, what output is retained, and the critical cross-platform heat caveat. No filler or redundant schema repetition.

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?

The description covers the core output semantics (rank, heat, similarity grouping) and an important interpretation caveat. However, with no output schema and three undocumented parameters, the tool definition leaves the agent to guess how limit and query affect results and what the response shape is beyond the general mentions.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for explaining limit, query, and source_ids. It only partially hints at platform selection by naming weibo, toutiao, and baidu, but omits 'x', and gives no guidance on what limit or query control. This is a significant gap.

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 names a specific action ('查询') with a clear resource ('多平台热榜') and lists concrete platforms (微博热搜、今日头条热榜、百度热搜). It also distinguishes itself from the news search/aggregation siblings by focusing on trending rankings and cross-platform similarity.

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 intended use case is implied: retrieve trending topics from multiple Chinese platforms. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over siblings like search_china_news or aggregate_china_news, nor any exclusion criteria.

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