App Openapi Add Auth Path

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It only signals '(写操作)' (write operation); it omits permission/admin requirements, whether the path is appended or replaces existing entries, idempotency, and any side effects on running services.

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 short clause with no filler and the write-operation qualifier front-loaded in parentheses. It is efficient, though arguably too terse to be fully informative.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and all six parameters are documented in the schema. The remaining gap is contextual: no indication of required context (app installation state, OpenAPI enablement) or relation to sibling auth-path tools for a 6-parameter mutation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing beyond the schema about app_name, path, host, port, scheme, or profile semantics, meaning the schema does all the explanatory work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: adding an OpenAPI auth path for an application, plus the parenthetical '(写操作)' flags it as a mutation. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings such as app_openapi_allow_auth_paths or app_openapi_add_auth_inherit_file.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. that the app must be installed or the OpenAPI service enabled), and no mention of how this differs from app_openapi_allow_auth_paths or app_openapi_add_auth_inherit_file. The agent must infer placement among neighboring auth-path tools.

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