diagnose_collect

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the operation is read-only ('只读') and does not listen or bind ports ('不监听不绑定端口'), which is critical safety information. It also lists the specific data being collected, providing clear scope and reassurance.

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, front-loaded sentence that begins with the action and scope, then enumerates specific collected items. It is concise, with no filler or redundant 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?

The description fully covers the tool's purpose, safety profile, and data scope, and an output schema exists to document return values. However, it does not mention the relationship to sibling tool diagnose_report or typical usage scenarios, which would improve contextual integration into the broader diagnostic workflow.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so a baseline of 4 is appropriate. The description adds no parameter-specific details because there are none, but it does describe the data categories the tool collects, which are outputs rather than 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 clearly states a read-only action ('只读采集') on a specific resource (local environment info) and enumerates the exact data points: Python/Node/Go versions, PATH, port listening list, and disk remaining capacity. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like diagnose_report, which likely focuses on generating a report rather than collecting data.

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 use for gathering environment diagnostics, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or how it relates to diagnose_report. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer the expected workflow from the sibling list.

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