kitchin_cycle

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states a high-level purpose and does not explain how the stage is determined, what 'limit' controls, whether data is fetched or cached, or what the response contains. It is not misleading, but it is under-disclosing.

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 short sentence with no filler and the verb and object are front-loaded. It is concise, though at the expense of missing important usage and parameter detail.

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 tool with one unexplained parameter, no annotations, and many closely related sibling tools, a single clause is insufficient. The output schema exists and may document return values, but the description still leaves the agent unable to choose this tool confidently or understand the limit parameter.

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?

The input schema has one parameter, 'limit', with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description never mentions 'limit' or its effect, so an agent cannot infer the correct value to pass, especially given the default of 0.

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 uses a specific verb ('判断') and a clear resource ('当前库存周期阶段'), so an agent can tell it is meant to assess the current Kitchin cycle phase. However, it does not differentiate this tool from closely related siblings such as chart_kitchin_cycle, data_kitchin, or cycle_phase.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like data_kitchin, chart_kitchin_cycle, or cycle_detect. The description states only the basic function and provides no context, exclusions, or selection criteria.

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