get_evolution_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It announces a read-only operation ('查看') and lists the data returned. While it lacks detail on pagination or format, for a zero-parameter tool this is sufficient. No contradictions or missing critical traits.

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 two sentences, directly stating purpose and included data. Every word adds value, with no redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool does and what metrics are returned. For a simple read-only tool, no further context is needed.

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 tool has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information; it adds value by explaining the output content. Baseline 4 applies as there is nothing lacking.

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's purpose: viewing Evolution Engine metrics. It lists specific included items (experience count, strategy count, approval rate, contributor ranking), making the verb+resource combination precise. Among siblings, no other tool serves this function.

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 evolution metrics are needed but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer based on the tool's name and description.

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