boss_exchange

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. However, it only states the action without explaining consequences such as whether this creates a notification, requires acceptance, or modifies state. Critical details like authentication needs or side effects are omitted.

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 conveys the core purpose efficiently. There is no redundant or unnecessary information, making it clear and concise.

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 complexity (single parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what happens after the request (e.g., response format, success indication, or additional steps), leaving the agent without enough context to reliably use the tool.

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% (the only parameter 'security_id' has a brief description in the schema). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: '请求交换联系方式（手机号或微信）' meaning to request exchanging contact information. It specifies the action (request to exchange) and the resource (contact details), distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle chats, applications, or other operations.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or situations where this tool should or should not be used. Sibling tools include many similar actions, so explicit usage guidance is needed.

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