xiaohongshu_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states that the tool 'checks' cookie validity, but does not explain whether this involves network requests, side effects, or what constitutes an invalid cookie. For a read-only check, this is minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action and resource, achieving maximum conciseness with zero filler.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks essential context such as parameter semantics and usage guidelines. It is minimal and leaves the user to infer the tool's role and input requirements. For a simple tool this is somewhat acceptable, but clear gaps remain.

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%, and the description does not clarify the meaning or expected format of the 'account' parameter. The name 'account' could refer to an account ID or the cookie string itself, but the description does not disambiguate. This is a significant gap given the schema offers no help.

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 uses a specific verb ('Check') and identifies the exact resource ('Xiaohongshu account cookie') and the purpose ('is valid'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling check tools like kuaishou_check and bilibili_check, which target different platforms.

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 implies the tool is used to validate a cookie before performing Xiaohongshu operations, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites. The context is implied rather than clearly stated.

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