huoQuZhangJie

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but only says it 'retrieves content' – no disclosure about permissions, error cases (invalid chapter number), output format, or whether this is a pure read.

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, efficient sentence with no waste, front-loaded with the action and resource. Appropriately terse for a simple one-parameter tool.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse – it doesn't explain what 'content' includes (text only? metadata? nested scenes?) or how a missing chapter is handled, leaving the agent under-informed.

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 coverage is 100%, so the single parameter zhangJieHao (章节号) is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or constraint details beyond that baseline.

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 states a clear verb+resource: retrieve the content of a specified chapter. It's specific enough to distinguish from siblings like lieJuZhangJie (list chapters) and chuangJianZhangJie (create chapter), though it doesn't explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

Usage is implied by the understandably narrow purpose of fetching a chapter's content, but there's no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives like listing chapters first to obtain a valid chapter number.

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