yuque_get_doc

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

The description mentions a read permission requirement, but with no annotations, it carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not describe side effects, mutability, or any other behavioral traits beyond the permission.

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 very concise, starting with the core purpose, then permission, then parameters. Every part serves a clear function with no redundancy.

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 the existence of an output schema and moderate parameter count, the description adequately covers permission and parameter meanings. However, it lacks comparison with similar tools and does not mention potential error conditions or limitations, leaving some completeness gaps.

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?

All five parameters are described with brief Chinese labels (e.g., '团队/用户 login', '知识库 slug'), adding context beyond the schema's titles. Though not exhaustive, this meaningfully aids understanding.

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 '获取文档详情' (get document details), which clearly indicates the action and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like yuque_get_doc_by_book_id or yuque_get_docs, missing an opportunity to clarify uniqueness.

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 lists required parameters and a read permission, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusion criteria.

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