todo_get

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. The word '查询' (query) implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose behavior on missing ids, permissions, or any side effects. It is minimal but not misleading, so a mid-range score is appropriate.

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 with no filler words. It provides the core purpose without unnecessary detail, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 simple get-by-id tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It does not need to describe return values since the output schema exists. It lacks explicit prerequisites (e.g., item must exist), but that is less critical for a basic query operation.

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%, but the description explicitly says '按 id' (by id), clarifying that the required item_id parameter is the unique identifier of the todo item. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare parameter name, though it does not explain the string format, which the schema already handles.

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 '按 id 查询单个事项详情' clearly states the action (query details) and resource (single todo item) with a specific identifier. It differentiates from siblings like todo_list by specifying a single item lookup, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 usage context: use this to fetch details for a known id. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the 'by id' qualifier provides clear context that this is for single-item retrieval rather than listing, which is sufficient.

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