apifox_import_export_info

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 that it retrieves information, implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or what format the information is returned in. This is inadequate for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a simple informational tool, though it could be slightly more specific to improve clarity without losing conciseness.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the return values are, the format of the information, or any behavioral context. For a tool that retrieves functional information, more details about the output and usage context are needed to be fully helpful to an agent.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the input schema fully documents the lack of parameters. The description does not add any parameter information, which is appropriate since there are no parameters to describe. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, as the description need not compensate for any gaps.

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 '获取导入导出功能的说明信息' (Get import/export function description information) states a clear purpose (get information about import/export features) but is somewhat vague about what specific information is retrieved. It distinguishes from siblings like 'apifox_api_info' or 'apifox_project_info' by focusing on import/export functionality, but lacks specificity about the verb and resource scope.

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 any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on the tool name alone. There is no explicit comparison with sibling tools like 'apifox_check_access' or 'apifox_environment_info'.

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