get_api_detail

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

没有任何annotations，描述本身只说了获取信息，没有披露返回值结构、分页行为、权限要求、是否只读等。对于没有annotations的工具，描述的负担较重，而它只提供了最基本的信息。

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?

一句话，简洁明了，没有冗余。虽然简短，但在信息量有限的前提下，结构上能够直接传达核心用途。

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?

没有输出schema，因此描述需要解释返回什么，但它没有。三个必需参数都已在schema中定义，但缺少返回值说明、使用示例、错误行为等信息。对于一个API详情查询工具来说，这些信息对于agent正确调用至关重要。

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?

输入schema对三个参数的描述覆盖率是100%，每个参数都有明确的type和description。描述本身没有添加任何额外的参数语义，但schema已经做了足够的工作，因此给出基线3分。

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?

描述包含明确动词“获取”和资源“指定接口的详细信息”，说明这是一个查询工具。虽然描述没有提及具体字段，但信息是清晰且无歧义的。它没有明确与sibling工具区分，但整体上可以让agent理解其用途。

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?

没有提供任何使用场景、触发条件、前置条件或与其他工具的对比信息。描述仅说明工具做什么，完全没有说明什么时候使用或什么时候不使用。

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