Get Yunxin application details

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this as a safe read. The description adds that IM configuration is only returned on request, which is useful behavioral context, but says nothing about permissions, what happens with an unknown app name, or response shape beyond the field list.

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?

Two compact sentences with no waste; the returned-data summary comes first and the parameter hint second, so the agent gets the essentials immediately.

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?

For a zero-required-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and a readOnly annotation, the definition covers scope and the optional IM config flag adequately. Missing only edge-case behavior (unknown app, default resolution) to be fully complete.

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 all three parameters are already documented, including the YUNXIN_CONSOLE_DEFAULT_APP fallback and the defaults for includeConfig/includeImConfig. The description repeats the app name/appid flexibility without adding new syntax or format detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (查询) and resource (单个应用) and enumerates what is returned: 基本信息、产品配置, with IM 配置 optional. The singular scope implicitly separates it from yunxin_apps_list, but no sibling is named, so it falls short of a 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 phrase '查询单个应用' implies usage for single-app lookups versus the list tool, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as yunxin_apps_list or yunxin_im_config_get, and no statement about failure behavior when the app is not found.

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