ruyi_trace_get_results

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 reveal a key behavior (does not stop trace) and the return type, but it omits whether a trace must be active, whether it consumes entries, or any error conditions. This is useful but incomplete for a tool with no safety annotations.

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 exactly two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and a key behavioral distinction. No filler or redundant phrases; every word earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must provide necessary context. It omits critical information such as whether a trace must be started first, how pageIdx works, and what happens if no trace is active. For a paginated getter, this is too incomplete for an agent to use fully correctly.

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?

The schema has 2 parameters with only 50% description coverage: limit is described but pageIdx is undocumented. The tool description itself does not mention either parameter or explain pagination, failing to compensate for the undocumented pageIdx. An agent receives no guidance on how parameters affect results beyond the schema's partial limit description.

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 uses a specific verb '获取' (get) with a clear resource '追踪结果' (trace results), and explicitly states it does not stop tracing, distinguishing it from ruyi_trace_stop. It also specifies the return content as recent BiDi event entries, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 '不停止追踪' (without stopping tracing) clearly signals the tool is for retrieving current results while tracing remains active, implying a distinct use case from ruyi_trace_stop. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use scenarios, so it stops short of a fully explicit guideline.

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