ui_hide

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds one piece of behavioral context: the operation is dual-mode and reversible ('或恢复'), which softens the destructive framing. It does not state scope (per-user vs project-wide), persistence, or side effects.

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?

A single compact clause, front-loaded with the primary action and parenthetically covering the inverse. No waste, but its brevity borders on under-specification rather than deliberate tightness.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description omits the essentials: default behavior when 'unhide' is omitted, whether hiding is reversible beyond the unhide flag, and how the target view is identified. Annotations only cover the read/write axis.

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%: 'unhide' is documented as '改成恢复显示', and project/workdir/view_id all carry their own descriptions. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the 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+resource pair ('对用户隐藏...一条视图') and even covers the inverse mode (恢复). However, it gives no differentiation from close siblings such as ui_clear, ui_override, or ui_views, so the agent must guess which UI mutation tool applies.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of the alternatives (ui_clear, ui_override, ui_views). The agent cannot tell from the description whether hiding is a soft, reversible suppression or a hard removal like ui_clear.

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