baidu_task_infoRetrieve details and status for a Baidu Netdisk upload or download transfer task by task ID, so you can monitor progress or confirm completion.
查询网盘传输任务详情。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| host | No | NAS 主机地址（IP 或域名） | |
| port | No | NAS 端口，如 5667（HTTPS）/5666（HTTP）/443 | |
| state | No | running | |
| scheme | No | 传输协议 | |
| profile | No | 独立 session profile 名称，默认使用 default | |
| task_id | Yes | 任务 ID | |
| transfer | No | download |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only implies a read operation. It says nothing about authentication/session needs (the host/port/profile params imply a session context), rate limits, or how running vs completed tasks behave.
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 sentence with no wasted words, but that brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than being efficiently 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?
For a 7-parameter tool with two undescribed enums, no annotations, and session/connection params (host, port, scheme, profile), the description explains almost nothing. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the selection semantics of task type/state remain unexplained.
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 description adds no parameter meaning at all. Schema coverage is 71%, and notably the two enum parameters (state, transfer) have no descriptions in the schema, so the gap is not compensated anywhere.
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 verb (查询) and a resource (网盘传输任务详情), so the agent can tell it reads task detail rather than acting on tasks. However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings such as baidu_task_list, and '详情' is not elaborated.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this versus baidu_task_list, baidu_task_action or baidu_task_clear, and no prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The agent must infer its place among the task-related siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.