Retrieve the download report from a previous batch PDF download by specifying the output directory. Returns the full report content or a message if the report is missing.
读取指定目录下的 download_report.txt 下载报告内容。
Args:
output_dir: 之前批量下载时指定的输出目录
Returns:
报告文件全文。若文件不存在返回 "报告不存在"
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| output_dir | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool reads the report file, returns its full text, and returns a specific fallback message when the file does not exist. This is sufficient for a simple read-only retrieval tool.
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 short, well-structured with Args and Returns sections, and every sentence adds useful information. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.
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 one-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers the input semantics, the return value, and the missing-file behavior. Nothing essential is left out.
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 fully compensates. It explains that output_dir is the output directory from a previous batch download, giving the agent the needed context to supply the correct path, which the bare schema does not provide.
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 states a specific verb and resource: it reads the download_report.txt file in a given directory. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling download tools, which perform downloads rather than report 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?
The description explains that output_dir refers to the output directory previously used during a batch download, which implicitly signals that this tool is meant to be used after batch_download_pdfs. It gives clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.