我创建的群组详情

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 discloses the response envelope, a detailed data payload, enum meanings, and ownership scope via '我创建的'. It does omit auth requirements and error behavior for invalid or non-owned topicId values, but the GET method and detailed response contract cover the main behavior.

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 purpose and endpoint are front-loaded, and the response field enumeration is useful because there is no output schema. The description is dense and partly redundant with the schema's parameter documentation, but every piece contributes to understanding the response contract.

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 single-parameter detail GET with no output schema, the description provides a full response contract including field meanings and enum values. Minor gaps remain around non-200 error semantics and authentication expectations, but the tool is otherwise callable with the information provided.

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's parameter line ('topicId(群组编号,必填)') largely repeats what the schema already provides in the required field and its description. It adds no format, constraints, or behavioral nuance 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 opens with the exact HTTP verb and endpoint and states a specific operation: retrieving details of a group the caller created. The '我创建的' scope helps distinguish it from list and join-detail sibling tools, even though no sibling is explicitly named.

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 intended use is implied by the title and the phrase '我创建的群组详情', but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives like open_topic_list or open_topic_join_detail, nor any mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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