file_organize_preview

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 clearly discloses the non-destructive nature ('dry-run，不移动文件'), which is critical. It also explains rule structure, but does not describe other potential side effects or return details beyond what the output schema likely covers.

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 two short, purposeful sentences. The first front-loads the core behavior and the second concisely explains rule item structure. No wasted words.

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?

For a dry-run preview tool with an output schema and moderate parameter complexity, this is largely complete. It covers the non-destructive behavior, rule structure, and provides enough context for an agent. The only gap is the undefined path parameter, but its name is fairly self-explanatory given the tool's purpose.

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 adds meaning to the rules parameter by stating each item contains 'pattern(glob) 与 target(目标子目录)', but the required path parameter is not described at all. This is a partial compensation.

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 starts with '预览按规则归档的影响清单' (preview the impact list of archiving by rules), which is a specific verb+resource. It explicitly says 'dry-run，不移动文件' (dry-run, does not move files), clearly distinguishing it from file_organize_apply and other apply tools.

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 clearly states this is a dry-run that does not move files, implying it is safe to use before applying changes. However, it does not explicitly name the alternative file_organize_apply or provide a when-not-to-use condition, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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