Get Friend Demographics

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation (Get) but does not disclose response format, potential errors, or side effects. The mention of 'breakdowns' gives some indication of output structure, but it is not detailed.

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 sentence with no redundant words. It is concise and well-structured, conveying the essential purpose without extraneous details.

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 is adequate for a tool with no parameters and no output schema. It identifies the resource (friends of the LINE Official Account) and the kind of data (demographics with breakdowns), which is sufficient for an agent to decide when to call it.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the empty schema is fully covered. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4; the description adds no parameter information because none is needed. No ambiguity exists.

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 a specific action ('Get') and resource ('demographic information about friends'), and specifies the breakdowns ('gender, age, area'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve other friend-related data like follower IDs or counts.

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 explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the tool name and description make its purpose obvious. It lacks explicit guidance on conditions or exclusions, but the straightforward nature of the read operation reduces ambiguity.

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