get_programs

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the action without any behavioral context. It does not mention if the tool is read-only, requires special authentication beyond provided defaults, or any side effects. The default credentials ('root'/'easybot') imply a certain environment but this is not explained.

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 very concise, listing parameters in a structured way. However, it lacks a clear front-loaded summary of the tool's purpose; the main action is only stated in the first sentence, and the rest is parameter documentation.

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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not mention what 'programs' means, return format, error conditions, or prerequisites. The tool appears to be an SSH-based retrieval, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 0%, so the description should add meaning. However, it merely repeats the parameter names (IP, username, password) with brief labels. It does not explain format constraints, valid values, or how they affect the operation.

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: get all programs of a specified IP robot. The verb '获取' (get) and resource '程序' (programs) are specific, and the tool is distinct from sibling tools that focus on connection, movement, or state retrieval.

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 or alternatives. For example, it does not mention prerequisites like needing an active connection (sibling connect_ur exists) or when to prefer this over other tools. The description only explains parameters, not usage context.

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