decrypt_and_extract_appid

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'find locally' and 'decrypt and extract' but does not clarify side effects (e.g., file writes), required permissions, or whether the extraction is destructive.

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 front-loads the main action. It could be improved by breaking into steps, but remains efficient.

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 4 parameters, no schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the output (despite output schema), the meaning of 'find locally', or the optional parameter 'package_root'.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description should compensate. It only explains 'appid' and the default version behavior, omitting 'output_dir' and 'package_root', leaving their purpose unclear.

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 finds an AppID locally and then decrypts and extracts it, with 'choose the latest version by default' clarifying version selection. It distinguishes itself from siblings like decrypt_and_extract_dir and decrypt_wxapkg by targeting a specific app ID.

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 implies usage when an AppID is known and version selection is desired, but does not explicitly describe when to use this versus sibling tools or mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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