Dpanel Env Switch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a state mutation (switching the active environment) but says nothing about scope or persistence — whether the change applies to subsequent calls, whether it is session- or server-global, or whether it can be reverted. For a context-mutating tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

A single short sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity comes at the cost of the missing detail noted in other dimensions.

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-value explanation is not required. However, for a one-parameter tool that silently mutates the agent's operating environment, the definition omits the side effect, the source of valid env_name values, and any reversal path — leaving the agent under-informed about the call's consequences.

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 0% for the single parameter env_name, so the description must compensate and does not. It never states that env_name is an identifier string that must match an existing environment, nor where to obtain valid values.

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 concrete verb ('切换' / switch) and resource ('当前 Docker 环境') with a scoping qualifier ('多主机' / multi-host). It is easy to distinguish from siblings like dpanel_env_list or dpanel_env_delete, but it never names those siblings explicitly to reinforce the distinction.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no prerequisite such as 'call dpanel_env_list first to obtain a valid env_name'. The agent must infer that this tool targets the session's active environment rather than any per-call override.

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