get_ur_software_version

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the tool requires network connectivity, what happens if the IP is unreachable, or if the operation is read-only. The description is minimal and lacks behavioral context beyond the basic purpose.

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 concise with two short sentences and no extraneous information. It front-loads the action and parameter explanation. While not formally structured, it efficiently conveys the essential information.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It tells what it does and what the parameter means, but omits details like return format, error handling, or usage examples. Given the lack of output schema, some description of the result would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for the 'ip' parameter. The description adds the note 'IP：机器人地址' (IP: robot address), which clarifies the parameter's purpose. However, it does not specify IP format (e.g., IPv4) or validation rules. The description adds some value but is basic.

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 retrieves the software version of a robot given an IP address. It specifies the verb 'get' and the resource 'software version', making the purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_robot_model or get_serial_number, which also retrieve robot information.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclude other tools. For example, it does not note that other getter tools might be more appropriate for different robot attributes.

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