get_namespace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says '获取详情' (get details), which implies a read operation, but does not state side effects, required permissions, or what constitutes 'details.' The description lacks transparency about response format or potential errors.

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. However, it is too brief and lacks essential details, so brevity comes at the cost of informativeness. Every sentence should earn its place; here, it does not provide enough value.

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 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and a 25% schema coverage, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what details are returned, how to construct the parameters, or any constraints. A minimal viable description would at least define the parameters and output.

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 description coverage is 25% (only namespaceName has a description). The tool description adds no parameter information, failing to compensate for the low coverage. Parameters like appId and env are left entirely undocumented in both schema and description, making it hard for the agent to know how to use them.

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 retrieves details of a namespace ('获取指定 Namespace 详情'). The verb '获取' (get) and resource 'Namespace 详情' are specific, but it does not differentiate from siblings like get_namespace_lock or list_namespaces, which also relate to namespaces.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context about typical use cases. Sibling tools like create_namespace or list_namespaces offer related functionality, but the description does not clarify when get_namespace should be preferred.

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