在资源管理器中定位

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

由于没有 annotations，描述需要承担行为说明责任。它披露了会在资源管理器中选择并定位文件，属于会唤起/聚焦 UI 的操作，但没有说明是否打开新窗口、路径无效时的行为或平台限制等细节。

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?

描述只有一句，先说明核心动作和对象，再说明用途，信息密度高且没有冗余。对于这个简单工具，长度和结构都合适。

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?

这是一个单参数、无输出 schema 的简单 UI 定位工具，描述已覆盖动作、对象、平台环境和典型用途，足以指导调用。缺少的主要是异常路径或窗口聚焦行为等次要细节。

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?

输入 schema 覆盖率为 100%，path 参数已在 schema 中说明为“要定位的完整路径”。描述没有在 schema 之外补充路径格式、是否支持相对路径或特殊字符等额外语义，因此按基线为 3。

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?

描述明确给出了具体动作“选中并定位”和对象“文件/目录”，并限定在 Windows 资源管理器环境中，能够与搜索、计数、文件信息等兄弟工具在动作层面区分开。但没有显式点名兄弟工具或说明与它们的选择关系。

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?

“方便用户直接查看或双击打开”暗示了适用场景：需要让用户在资源管理器中查看或打开文件时使用。但没有说明何时不应使用，也没有提及其他替代工具或前置条件，使用边界仍依赖推断。

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