ruyi_get_script_source

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the two access modes but does not explain what happens if both modes are specified, how pageIdx works, what the return format is, or how errors are handled. This is a significant gap for a tool with no output schema.

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 communicates the core purpose and key capabilities without any wasted words. Every element earns its place, making it highly efficient.

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 tool with 6 parameters, two selection modes, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify when to use offset vs. line numbers, what pageIdx does, or what the response structure looks like. This leaves the agent with many unanswered questions for correct invocation.

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 83%, which is high, but the description adds a conceptual model by categorizing parameters into 'line number range' (startLine, endLine) and 'character offset' (offset, length) modes. This goes beyond the individual schema descriptions, giving the agent a better mental model for parameter usage.

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 the tool retrieves a source code snippet for a specified URL, with support for line-number ranges or character offsets. This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from siblings like ruyi_list_scripts, ruyi_save_script_source, and ruyi_search_in_sources.

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 implies usage by explaining the two selection modes (line range vs. character offset), but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It leaves the user to infer the appropriate context from the schema.

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