workflow

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

The description claims the tool creates/updates files (missing files are auto-created/updated), which contradicts the annotation readOnlyHint=true indicating read-only behavior. This is a serious inconsistency.

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?

Two sentences: first states primary function, second adds secondary file management. No wasted words, front-loaded.

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?

The description explains it returns a phased guide but lacks details on output format. The contradiction with annotations undermines completeness. For a meta-tool with no output schema, more behavioral context is needed.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. The tool's intent and scenario parameters are already well described in 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 purpose: use when unsure which MCP tool to use, and it returns a phased guide. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which are specific actions.

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?

Explicitly says '当不确定该用哪个 MCP 工具时使用' (use when unsure), providing clear usage context. However, it doesn't specify when not to use or list alternatives.

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