Retrieve the full initialization requirements for one peripheral driver from its *_port.h adapter comments. Use a name from peripheral_api_list to get the driver's setup details.
单个驱动的外设初始化要求全文（取自其 *_port.h 适配层原注释）。 name 来自 peripheral_api_list。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the content is derived from header comments, implying read-only documentation retrieval. However, it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, side effects, or failure conditions. Adds some context but not comprehensive.
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?
Two compact sentences, front-loaded with purpose and then parameter sourcing. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy.
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 the description need not detail return values. It explains the content source and where to obtain the parameter. Minor gaps remain around error handling or alternatives, but it is complete enough for a simple getter with output schema support.
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?
With one parameter and 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by stating the origin of 'name' (from peripheral_api_list). It does not add format, constraints, or examples, leaving some ambiguity about 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 specific verb (get) and resource (full text of a single driver's peripheral initialization requirements) and names the source (*_port.h adaptation layer comments). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the list sibling by noting that 'name' comes from peripheral_api_list.
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?
Provides clear context: use this after peripheral_api_list to fetch full text for a given name. The parameter sourcing is stated. No explicit when-not or alternative tools are mentioned, but the dependency is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.