get_quantum_backend

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds matching order and case-insensitivity details, plus confirmation of no fuzzy search, which is valuable context beyond the annotation safety profile.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by precise matching rules. Every sentence contributes information without redundancy.

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?

Simple single-parameter read operation with an output schema. Annotations cover safety profile, description covers matching semantics. No essential information is missing for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 has 0% description coverage for the parameter, but the description compensates by explaining that 'identifier' can be a resource id or code and defines exact matching semantics. This adds meaning beyond the bare string type in the schema.

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?

Description uses specific verb '查询' (query) and identifies resource type '天衍云量子资源' (Tianyan Cloud quantum resources). It explicitly states exact matching by id or code, and excludes fuzzy/name search, distinguishing it from sibling list tool.

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?

Clearly states matching behavior (id first, then case-insensitive code) and explicitly excludes fuzzy search, implying use when exact id/code is known. However, it does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools like list_available_quantum_backends for browsing scenarios.

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