eda_sys_message_bus_pull_async

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it is a Promise-based async operation and that only one message is pulled per call, but omits error behavior, whether messages are consumed (destructive), timeouts, or what happens when the queue is empty. This is a significant gap for a pull operation.

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 brief and structured with a signature, a Chinese purpose line, remarks, and returns section. Every line adds some value, though the Chinese text is partially redundant with 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?

For a simple pull tool, the description leaves out critical operational details: how to pass the topic via the args array, what the return value looks like (type 'any'), and behavior on empty queue or errors. The lack of an output schema and annotations heightens the need for these details.

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 description provides the signature with a 'topic' parameter, which adds meaning beyond the generic 'args' array in the schema. However, it doesn't explicitly clarify that the topic should be placed as the first element of the args array, leaving potential ambiguity for an agent constructing the call.

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 this is the async/private message bus pull operation ('私有消息总线：拉消息 Promise 版本'), with a concrete signature. It distinguishes from public variants by name and description, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with the sync private version (eda_sys_message_bus_pull).

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 vs. alternatives (e.g., sync pull, public pull). The remarks mention only that it pulls one message at a time and can be awaited, but there is no context about prerequisites or when the public variants would be preferred.

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