eda_sch_primitive_object_get_all

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the return type and that it gets all binary embedded objects; it does not confirm whether the operation is read-only, whether it applies to the current window, or what the objects contain. This is minimal behavioral context.

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 short: a signature line, a Chinese purpose line, and a return-type line. It is front-loaded and has little filler, though the 'returns' line partly duplicates the signature.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and only a terse bilingual description, the agent lacks information about the shape of ISCH_PrimitiveObject, how window selection affects results, and what to place in the generic 'args' array. This is not sufficient for fully confident invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, with the schema describing both 'args' and 'windowId'. The description adds nothing about parameters, and the generic 'args' field remains opaque for this specific tool, meaning the agent still lacks concrete parameter detail beyond the schema.

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 operation: 'sch_PrimitiveObject.getAll()' and '获取所有二进制内嵌对象' (get all binary embedded objects), with a return type of an array. It has a specific verb and resource, but does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as eda_sch_primitive_object_get or eda_sch_primitive_object_get_all_primitive_id.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this returns full object data, how it differs from ID-only getters, or when a user would prefer get_all_primitive_id, so the agent must infer usage solely from the tool name.

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