获取 YApi 接口详情

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the operation is a read ('获取') and mentions return content (request info, response structure), but does not clarify authentication needs, error behavior, or any limitations. This leaves significant behavioral aspects undisclosed.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the primary action and purpose. No wasted words; all content is relevant.

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 tool, the description adequately covers the main purpose and return content. However, the phrase '等完整内容' is vague and does not enumerate specific fields, and there is no output schema to compensate. Still, it is complete enough for basic usage.

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% for the single 'id' parameter, which is already described as '接口 ID'. The description adds context by explaining it fetches by ID, but does not provide additional semantics 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 tool's function: '根据接口 ID 获取 YApi 接口详情' (get YApi interface detail by interface ID), and specifies what it returns ('包含请求信息、响应结构等完整内容'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list or search interfaces, though it does not explicitly differentiate from 'get_api_detail'.

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 lacks explicit context such as 'use this after obtaining an ID from a list tool' or 'for listing use get_api_list'. The usage is only implied by the ID parameter.

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