Discover

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: no mention of network access, whether authentication is required, whether the call mutates server-side state, or what happens on an unreachable URL. The presence of an output schema covers return values, but the operational profile of the call remains entirely undocumented.

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 waste, which is appropriate in size, but the brevity comes at the cost of information rather than through efficient compression. There is no front-loaded explanation of what an agent gets back or what the parameter needs.

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?

The output schema relieves the description of explaining return values, but for a discovery tool that requires a URL argument and has no annotations, the description should at minimum state what is discovered and what form the server_url must take. Neither is present, so an agent would be guessing on first invocation.

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 0% for the single required server_url parameter, and the description never mentions the parameter at all — no expected format, scheme, trailing-slash conventions, or whether it must be a configured server. The description fails to compensate for the schema 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?

"发现服务端 API 信息" states a verb (discover) and a resource (server-side API information), but "API information" is vague — it doesn't say whether it fetches a discovery document, a capability list, or metadata. It also doesn't distinguish itself from siblings like list_servers or list_services, which arguably overlap in intent.

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?

No statement of when to call this versus alternatives such as set_server_url, list_servers, or register. An agent cannot tell whether discovery must precede registration or whether it is a read-only probe, so usage must be inferred from the tool name alone.

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