pm_persona

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It implies the preview mode ('预演') is non-mutating and describes conceptually what is returned (facets, weights, activated facets, cross-state), but never explicitly states that it is read-only, that the simulation persists nothing, or whether any permissions are needed.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary view function followed by the optional simulation mode. No filler.

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 single optional-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers both modes and the effect of the parameter adequately. It could state the read-only nature of the preview more explicitly, but nothing essential is missing.

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% and the schema already marks the param as optional, but the description adds real value by explaining what supplying the text actually does: previews which facets it activates and whether a cross-state is entered.

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 ('查看' / view) and resource ('人设面与权重' / persona facets and weights), plus a second mode (previewing activation of facets). It is clearly distinguishable from generic siblings like pm_status or pm_trace, though it does not explicitly name any sibling it differs from.

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 indicates a usage scenario for the optional parameter — supply a hypothetical sentence to preview activation and cross-state — but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pm_status, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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