sx_operation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that the operation is read-only via the whitelist and that parameters are serialized to operationParJsonStr. However, it does not state behavior for non-whitelisted keys, return format, error handling, or authorization needs, leaving significant gaps.

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 concise, with the purpose front-loaded and details about the whitelist and serialization in a compact second sentence. It avoids unnecessary verbosity and is easy to scan, though the whitelist could be formatted more clearly.

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 the complexity of a generic operation dispatcher with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It covers the whitelist and serialization but misses return format, validation behavior, and per-operation parameter details. The existence of specific siblings might mitigate the need, but the generic tool should clarify its role and limitations.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'par' is a dict and will be serialized, and that 'operation_key' selects from the whitelist. But it does not describe the specific parameter structures for each operation, limiting the agent's ability to construct correct inputs.

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 it executes a generic operation (三效自定义方法) and lists the whitelisted read-only operations, which helps distinguish it from specific sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly define what '三效' means or how it relates to the siblings, making differentiation partial.

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 implies the tool is for invoking read-only operations from the whitelist, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over specific siblings like sx_get_user_permission. There is no explicit condition, exclusion, or guidance on when not to use it.

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