force_sync_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose side effects (e.g., overwrites local data), permissions needed, rate limits, or error handling. '强制' (force) hints at urgency but lacks specifics on what makes it forceful.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the core action, zero waste. Efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a mutation tool (implied by 'sync' to database) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks critical context: what data is synced, how conflicts are handled, success/failure indicators, and comparison to similar tools.

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 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond implying 'latest data' relates to 'periods', but doesn't clarify semantics like what '同步期数' (sync periods) entails operationally.

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 ('强制同步' - force sync) and the resource ('指定彩票类型的最新数据到本地数据库' - specified lottery type's latest data to local database). It distinguishes from siblings like 'sync_lottery_data' by emphasizing 'force' and 'latest data', though not explicitly contrasting them.

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 like 'sync_lottery_data' or other data-fetching siblings (e.g., 'get_latest_ssq'). The description implies it's for syncing latest data but doesn't specify scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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