host_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions query modes (ID exact, name fuzzy) but doesn't disclose behavior like pagination limits, default limit of 10, whether results are sorted, or what happens with multiple filters combined. The description is minimal and doesn't add much beyond the schema.

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 a single concise sentence in Chinese, front-loading the main purpose and then adding the routing hint. It's efficient with no wasted words. However, it could be slightly more structured with separate sentences for usage guidance.

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 10 parameters and no annotations, the description is somewhat thin. It doesn't explain the difference between filter, search, and hostids, nor the output parameter behavior. The output schema exists, which helps, but the description doesn't clarify when to use this tool vs hostgroup_get_hosts or item_get. It's adequate but has clear gaps for a tool with this many parameters.

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 schema already documents all 10 parameters. The description adds a small amount of context by mentioning ID exact query and name fuzzy match, which maps to hostids and name parameters. However, it doesn't explain the relationship between filter, search, and hostids, or how output/selectGroups work. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema covers everything.

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 and resource: '查询主机列表' (query host list), and specifies two query modes: exact ID query or name fuzzy match. It also distinguishes itself from get_host_by_ip by saying to prefer that tool when IP is known. However, it doesn't fully differentiate from other sibling tools like hostgroup_get or item_get, though the resource is clear.

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 gives explicit guidance to use get_host_by_ip when IP is known, which is a clear alternative routing. It implies this tool is for name/ID-based queries. It doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool beyond the IP case, but the guidance provided is useful and specific.

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