yapi_import_data

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose safety and side-effect behavior, but it only says 'Import' without explaining whether it overwrites, merges, is reversible, or requires authentication. The sync_mode parameter hints at merge/overwrite behavior, but the description does not elaborate on consequences.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning, making it appropriately concise and structured.

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?

Despite having a detailed schema, the context is incomplete: no output format, no side-effect disclosure, no edge cases or prerequisites. The tool is a mutation with significant overwrite/merge potential, and the description alone leaves the agent underinformed.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters, so the description does not need to add much. It adds minimal context by referencing 'external sources' but otherwise relies on the schema.

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 ('Import') and the resource ('interface data from external sources'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create/update/delete by focusing on importing external data, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 is given on when to use this tool vs alternatives, prerequisites, or scenarios where it should be avoided. The description simply states the function without any usage context.

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