infuse_spirit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It describes the rating calculation but does not state whether the tool creates/modifies data, requires permissions, or has any side effects. The tool name 'infuse_spirit' suggests a mutation, but this is not clarified.

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 verbose with bilingual content (Chinese and English), emojis, and redundant formatting. While it is structured with sections, it could be more concise without losing clarity.

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?

Given no annotations, the description should cover behavioral context. It explains the rating formula but omits whether the appraisal is saved or returned. Since an output schema exists, the lack of return value description is acceptable, but the behavioral gap remains. For a tool with 9 parameters and 1 required, the description is moderately 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?

Although the input schema has 0% description coverage, the description provides detailed explanations for each parameter (e.g., 'inscription: 📝 铭文（描述清晰度）1-10'). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's titles and default values, fully compensating for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Artifact Appraisal — Rate an artifact across six dimensions' and lists the specific six dimensions (inscription, formation, etc.), which uniquely identifies the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from siblings like 'forge_agent' or 'refine_agent'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives is provided. The description only explains what the tool does, without mentioning prerequisites, exclusions, or context for use.

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