新增或更新过敏记录

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the general purpose and does not disclose key behavioral traits such as the upsert semantics (whether it creates or updates), whether it modifies existing data, if it requires existing records, or any side effects. No mention of safety or destructive potential.

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 a single sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It does not front-load the most important information (e.g., upsert behavior) and omits essential details, making it less effective than a well-structured multi-sentence description.

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 the tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is highly incomplete. It fails to explain the upsert logic, parameter usage, return values, or when to use this tool. A complete description would need to cover these aspects.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameter meanings. However, the description provides no details about any of the 7 parameters (allergen, reaction, severity, etc.) or how they should be used. This is a critical gap.

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 purpose: '记录药物、食物或其他过敏/不耐受信息' (record drug, food, or other allergy/intolerance information) and '用于用药安全检查' (used for medication safety check). It specifies the verb (record) and resource (allergy information), but does not explicitly mention the upsert behavior (create or update) or differentiate from sibling tool health_allergy_list.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like health_allergy_list, nor does it mention prerequisites, exclusion criteria, or when not to use it.

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