预处理信息详情

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that this is a GET request, requires membership, and documents the unified response shape including code, msg, data, and the data fields. It does not describe non-200 errors or authorization details, but for a simple detail-read tool this is reasonably transparent.

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 compact and front-loaded, starting with the endpoint and membership requirement, then giving the request parameter and response structure. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy or fluff.

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 tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it covers the endpoint, required auth, the input, and the full response data shape including contentType mapping. An agent has enough context to call the tool and interpret its result.

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 schema already covers 100% of the parameter with type, required status, and a Chinese description. The tool description essentially repeats the same preId meaning without adding new format, constraints, or usage detail, so it provides no additional semantic value beyond 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 identifies a GET endpoint that retrieves the detail of a preprocessing (预处理) record by preId, and lists the fields contained in the response. This differentiates it from sibling tools such as open_pre_list, open_pre_add, and open_pre_delete because it is specifically about retrieving one record's detail.

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 states that membership is required and that preId is mandatory, providing some usage context. However, it does not explicitly explain when to use this tool instead of open_pre_list or other preprocessing tools, so the usage is implied rather than clearly directed.

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