Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• fetch_wecom_docA
  3.6/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explains the core conversion action and notes supported file types, but fails to mention error handling, rate limits, authentication requirements beyond an optional cookie, or any side effects. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is extremely concise—a single sentence in Chinese—that immediately conveys the core action (fetch and convert) and scope (document types). It is front-loaded and contains no filler. Every word carries meaning.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the presence of sibling auth tools and no output schema, the description lacks crucial context. It does not explain prerequisites (e.g., need for prior authentication via set_wecom_cookie), what happens if cookie is invalid, or the format of the returned Markdown. For a tool with two parameters and moderate complexity, this is insufficiently complete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters: URL example and cookie explanation. The tool description adds general capability info but not parameter-specific details. Since the schema already covers parameter meanings, baseline 3 is appropriate; the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: fetching WeCom document content and converting to Markdown, supporting various types like docs, tables, and slides. The name fetch_wecom_doc aligns perfectly, and siblings set_wecom_cookie and check_wecom_auth are distinct auth-related tools, making differentiation easy.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for converting WeCom documents to Markdown but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or prerequisites. It mentions optional cookie but does not clarify if prior cookie setting (via sibling tool) is needed for successful fetch. No exclusions or conditions provided.

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

• check_wecom_authA
  3.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the purpose without clarifying what happens if the cookie is invalid, whether the operation is read-only, or any side effects.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, concise sentence with no extraneous information. It is appropriately front-loaded for quick comprehension.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given zero parameters, no output schema, and simple purpose, the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not describe the return value or behavior on failure, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's output.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  No parameters defined, so schema coverage is 100%. Per guidelines, 0 params yields a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter details.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool checks whether the saved Cookie is still valid, using a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from siblings (fetch_wecom_doc, set_wecom_cookie) which handle document fetching and cookie setting.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The context suggests this tool is for verifying authentication before using sibling tools, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The sibling names imply usage order.

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

• set_wecom_cookieA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  No annotations are provided, but the description discloses key behavioral traits: the cookie is saved to a local configuration file and automatically used for subsequent requests. This is sufficient for a simple setter tool, though it does not mention error handling or validation.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is extremely concise with two sentences, each providing essential information: the action and the acquisition method. No wasted words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool has only one parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the purpose, how to get the input, and the effect, though it could mention what happens if the cookie is invalid.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema covers 100% of parameters with a basic description for 'cookie'. The tool description adds value by explaining how to obtain the cookie value (browser steps), which is crucial semantic context beyond the schema's '完整的 Cookie 字符串'.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description explicitly states the action ('保存', save) and resource ('企业微信 Cookie 到本地配置文件'), and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying that the cookie will be automatically used in subsequent requests, differentiating from fetch_wecom_doc and check_wecom_auth.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides a clear method for obtaining the cookie (from browser), implying that this tool is a prerequisite for siblings. However, it does not explicitly state when to use or when not to use alternatives, though the context strongly implies usage before fetch_wecom_doc or check_wecom_auth.

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