get_character_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond these annotations, which is acceptable but does not enhance transparency further.

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 sentence, highly concise, and front-loads the purpose. Every word earns its place with no 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?

For a simple read tool with one parameter, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It could mention the output format or emphasize it as the primary character info tool, but overall it meets the need.

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 schema covers 100% of the single parameter with a description. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema already provides.

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 '获取角色详细信息' (get character details), and the tool name 'get_character_info' aligns. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_character_image' and 'get_character_persons' which fetch specific subsets.

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 phrase '仅在需要获得完整信息时使用' (only use when need complete info) provides a condition for use, implying when full detail is required rather than specific aspects. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions.

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