获取本地健康档案

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

Description mentions '默认脱敏' (desensitized by default), indicating output masking behavior. However, no other behavioral traits (e.g., auth requirements, caching, rate limits) are disclosed. With no annotations, the description carries the burden but provides only one behavioral detail.

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?

Single sentence, 12 characters, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the key action. Excessively concise but still informative.

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?

No output schema exists, yet description does not describe return format or structure beyond 'health profile'. For a getter, agents need to know what fields to expect. The description is too minimal to be complete for effective use.

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?

No parameters (0 params), so baseline is 4. Description adds no param info, but none needed. Schema already fully covers parameters (empty).

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?

Description clearly states it returns a single patient health profile, desensitized by default. Verb '返回' (returns) and resource '健康档案' (health profile) are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like health_profile_update (update) and health_document_get (document).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like health_document_get or health_profile_update. However, the simple retrieval purpose is implied, and context from sibling names provides differentiation. Missing when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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