get_user_recommendations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, what it returns, how it handles missing user_id or user_interests, or any side effects. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic purpose.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the key action '获取用户推荐'. It is not bloated, but it is slightly tautological with the tool name and could be more informative without losing conciseness.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 4 parameters, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, expected input combinations, or behavior under edge cases. For a tool with this complexity and no structured safety context, the description leaves significant gaps.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details; it merely says 'discover similar users or influential users', which loosely reflects the algorithm enum but does not explain parameter usage, defaults, or constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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 '获取用户推荐，发现相似用户或有影响力的用户' clearly states the tool's purpose: getting user recommendations focused on similar or influential users. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_article_recommendations and get_pin_recommendations by specifying 'users', but it does not explicitly differentiate from other generic recommendation tools like get_recommendations.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context in which this tool should be preferred over the many sibling recommendation tools. It only implies usage by its name and brief description.

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