maimemo_get_vocabulary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context of its own — nothing about lookup failure behavior (e.g., what happens when the word does not exist) or any auth/rate constraints.

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 phrase is short but that brevity reflects under-specification rather than economy — it is too thin to be useful and contains no front-loaded scoping or purpose information.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, so requirements are modest, but the description still fails to state what is returned (definitions, study state, translations) or how lookups behave for unknown words. The agent is left to infer the tool's contract entirely from the name and schema.

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% and there is only one required parameter ('spelling', documented as '单词拼写'), so the schema fully carries parameter semantics. The description adds nothing beyond it, which meets the baseline of 3 for high-coverage schemas.

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 '获取单词' (get word) essentially restates the tool name maimemo_get_vocabulary without adding specificity. It does not distinguish this single-word lookup from the sibling maimemo_list_vocabulary, nor indicate what data about the word is retrieved.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as maimemo_list_vocabulary or maimemo_get_notepad. No prerequisites, context, or exclusions are stated.

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