agileconfig_get_app

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states '获取详细信息' but does not disclose behavioral traits like whether it is read-only, what specific details are returned, authentication requirements, or rate limits. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient transparency.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose without fluff.

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 tool's low complexity (one parameter, read operation, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. However, it could explicitly state that the tool is read-only and outline the scope of '详细' (e.g., includes all app settings and permissions). Without annotations, a slightly richer description would be more robust.

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% for the single parameter 'id', which has a description '应用 ID'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, as it merely restates that the tool retrieves an app by ID. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full coverage.

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 the verb '获取' (get) and the resource '单个应用的详细信息' (detailed information of a single application), and specifies the identifier '应用 ID' (application ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_apps (which returns all apps without details) and create/delete/update_app.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For instance, it does not clarify that this tool is for fetching full details, while list_apps might be for an overview. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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