query_top_ua

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the purpose. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as that the tool is read-only, whether it requires any authorization, or what it returns. The description carries full burden for transparency but is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence that states the purpose directly. It is front-loaded and avoids verbosity, but could be slightly expanded without becoming wasteful.

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 output schema, the description should at least hint at the output format (e.g., list of top UAs with counts). It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about what the tool returns. This gap reduces completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema already describes all parameters (scope, domain, start_time, end_time). The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 '查询流量 Top UA 排行' clearly specifies the action (query) and resource (top UA ranking). It is concise and distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like query_top_domains, query_top_referer, and query_top_url by explicitly mentioning 'UA' (User Agent).

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., query_top_url for top URLs). No reasoning about context or exclusions is given, leaving the agent without decision support.

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