netease_liked_songs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description only adds the pagination trait ('分页'), and says nothing about ordering, rate limits, or what the returned items look like — modest added value over the structured hints.

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?

A single short phrase with no wasted words and the key qualifier front-loaded. It is, however, under-specified rather than efficient — there is room for one more sentence routing the agent away from netease_play_liked.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should indicate what a call returns (a list of song entries with ids for follow-up calls like netease_song_detail), and it should clarify the read-vs-play distinction. Neither is present, leaving real gaps for a tool with 25 siblings.

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%, but the two parameters are named limit and offset with defaults and min/max constraints in the schema, making them largely self-explanatory. The description only conveys the general pagination concept, adding no format or interaction details (e.g. how to page to the end, whether offset is in items) beyond the schema.

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 gives a specific verb (读取/read) and resource (我喜欢的音乐/liked songs) plus a scope qualifier (分页/paginated), so the agent knows exactly what is fetched. It does not, however, differentiate from the sibling netease_play_liked, which mentions the same resource and could easily be confused with a read operation.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. With siblings named netease_play_liked and netease_like sharing the 'liked' concept, the agent has to infer that this tool reads metadata rather than starting playback or mutating the liked list.

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