Reads MovieClip frame, FPS, Swing, and RepeatDelay settings from FairyGUI Editor, letting AI agents inspect animation timing parameters.
读取 MovieClip 的帧、FPS、Swing 和 RepeatDelay 设置。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | ||
| item_name | No | ||
| item_path | No | ||
| package_name | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.8.6Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations are absent, so the description must carry the disclosure burden. It clearly indicates a read operation via '读取', implying non-destructive behavior, but does not explicitly state side effects, error handling, or return format. It adds context about the specific attributes read, which is some behavioral disclosure, but not exhaustive.
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 short sentence, highly concise and front-loaded with the action. It covers the core purpose efficiently without waste, though it provides no additional helpful context.
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?
With four optional parameters and zero schema descriptions, the description is insufficient for an agent to correctly invoke the tool. Even though an output schema exists, the description does not describe the expected input selection or return behavior, leaving the tool incomplete for practical use.
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 schema has 0% description coverage for its parameters (url, item_name, item_path, package_name), and the description does not explain any of them. An agent has no clue how to populate these parameters to target a specific MovieClip, making this a significant gap.
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 ('读取' = read) and resource (MovieClip), and lists the specific fields to read (frame, FPS, Swing, RepeatDelay). This makes it distinct from related tools like fgui_update_movieclip or fgui_create_movieclip, though it does not explicitly name them.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention other getter tools (e.g., fgui_get_text_style) or specify scenarios where this tool is appropriate, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.