get_chat_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral burden. It describes the returned data fields but says nothing about permissions, rate limits, error behavior (e.g., unknown chat_name), or whether the operation is read-only. The phrase '已确认可获取的信息' hints at availability but does not disclose operational traits.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently enumerates the returned information with zero wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple getter.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are already covered, making the description's field list somewhat redundant. The description does not address the required parameter chat_name or any behavioral aspects, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke the tool correctly beyond what the schema provides.

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% for the single parameter chat_name. The description mentions '指定会话' (specified chat) but adds no meaning about what chat_name should be (e.g., exact name, ID, case sensitivity) or how to supply it. It does not compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 states a specific verb+resource: returns info for a specified chat, and lists the exact fields returned (name, type, observed message count, last time, watch-list status). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_chat_list or get_chat_history, but the purpose is clear enough.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it returns, leaving the agent to infer that it should be used when specific chat details are needed, with no exclusions or sibling comparisons.

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