env_cookie

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 states it's a retrieval operation ('获取'), implying read-only behavior, but doesn't specify if it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns specific data formats, or handles errors. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient to fully inform the agent about its behavior.

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 with a single phrase ('获取单个环境 Cookie'), which is front-loaded and wastes no words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 tool's complexity (2 undocumented parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what an 'environment cookie' is, how the parameters work, or what the return value might be. For a retrieval tool with such gaps in structured data, more context is needed to be fully helpful.

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 2 parameters (id and number) with 0% description coverage, meaning they are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no information about what these parameters mean, their expected formats, or how they relate to retrieving a cookie. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage, leaving parameters 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 action ('获取' meaning 'get' or 'retrieve') and the resource ('单个环境 Cookie' meaning 'single environment cookie'), which is specific and unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'env_query' or 'env_profile', which might also retrieve environment-related data, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 doesn't mention any prerequisites, context, or exclusions, such as whether it's for active environments only or how it differs from other query tools in the list. This leaves the agent with minimal usage context.

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