Dpanel Cron Detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and it provides none. It does not state it is a read-only lookup, whether the id must exist, or what happens for missing tasks.

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?

Extremely short, which is efficient, but it is under-specified rather than concise-and-complete. The single sentence is front-loaded but carries almost no information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but for a detail-fetch tool with no annotations and an undocumented id, the description leaves the agent guessing about prerequisites and lookup behavior.

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?

Single required 'id' parameter with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate and does not — it says nothing about the id's format or source. Baseline of 3 applies for the trivial single-param case, but no added meaning is given.

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?

States a specific verb-noun ('计划任务详情' / Cron task detail), which is a clear resource reference. However, it is boilerplate across the many '_detail' siblings (env_detail, container_detail, image_detail, network_detail, volume_detail), offering no distinction from those beyond the entity name embedded in the tool name itself.

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 versus dpanel_cron_list or the other cron siblings. The agent must infer that 'detail' means fetching a single record's full information by id, but nothing is stated.

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