Answer user questions by retrieving comparative information about Tesla and Anker Innovations from enterprise documents using graph-based knowledge retrieval.
用于查询特斯拉与安克创新的对比的相关信息
:param query: 用户提出的具体问题
:return: 最终获得的答案
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, and the description does not disclose return format, potential side effects, or any behavioral expectations beyond 'returns the final answer.' The tool's behavior is largely opaque.
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 extremely concise and to the point, with no unnecessary words or repetition. It effectively conveys the core function in a single sentence.
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?
The description is minimal and does not provide enough context for an agent to understand what kind of information will be returned, how to structure queries, or any edge cases. It lacks examples and clarifications that would make it fully self-contained.
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 sole parameter 'query' has no description in the schema. While the name implies it is a search query, no details are given about expected format, length, or examples, leaving the parameter semantics ambiguous.
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: to query comparison information between Tesla and Anker Innovations. The verb '查询' (query) is specific, and the object is well-defined. Since there are no sibling tools, differentiation is not needed.
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, how to formulate queries, or any limitations. The description mentions only the purpose, leaving usage context entirely implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.