yuque_get_toc

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get' without mentioning return format, pagination, auth requirements, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool that has no structured annotations to clarify behavior.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool, though it could be slightly expanded to include usage context without becoming verbose.

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 simple single-parameter read tool, the description is adequate but minimal. With no output schema, it does not explain what the TOC structure looks like or what fields the response contains. It is sufficient for basic understanding but lacks depth for an agent to anticipate the return format or error cases.

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 schema provides 100% coverage for the single parameter with a description including an example. The main description adds the synonym 'repo/book', which is a minor clarification but does not significantly augment the schema's information. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('table of contents (TOC) for a repo/book'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like yuque_get_repo, yuque_list_docs, and the complementary yuque_update_toc. The scope is unambiguous.

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 by naming the resource, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives or any exclusions. For example, it doesn't note that this returns the TOC structure while yuque_list_docs returns doc metadata. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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