parse_douyin_video_info

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 behavioral disclosure. It mentions parsing links and returning JSON-formatted video information, but lacks details on error handling, rate limits, authentication needs, or what specific video fields are included. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its operational behavior.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, with a clear purpose statement followed by brief sections for parameters and returns. Each sentence adds value without redundancy. Minor improvements could include bullet points or more structured formatting, but it remains efficient and well-organized.

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 tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is reasonably complete. It covers the purpose, parameter semantics, and output format. However, it lacks behavioral details like error cases or performance considerations, which would enhance completeness for a tool with no annotations.

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 description adds meaningful context beyond the input schema, which has 0% coverage. It explains that 'share_link' can be a Douyin share link or text containing a link, clarifying the parameter's purpose and acceptable formats. With only one parameter and no schema descriptions, this compensation is effective, though not exhaustive (e.g., no examples or validation rules).

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: '解析抖音分享链接，获取视频基本信息' (Parse Douyin share links to obtain basic video information). It specifies the verb ('解析' - parse) and resource ('抖音分享链接' - Douyin share links), and distinguishes from siblings like 'extract_douyin_text' and 'get_douyin_download_link' by focusing on video metadata rather than text extraction or download links. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings, keeping it at 4 instead of 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools ('extract_douyin_text' or 'get_douyin_download_link') or specify scenarios where this tool is preferred, such as for metadata retrieval versus content extraction. Usage is implied by the purpose but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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