biz_get_sku

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It characterizes the operation as a fetch ('取') and adds an input-provenance constraint, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, side effects, authorization needs, or error behavior. This is adequate for a simple getter but not richly 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: two short labeled sections, purpose first, then parameter provenance. Every sentence contributes essential information with zero filler.

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 lookup tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose and parameter provenance well. The only minor gaps are explicit read-only/safety disclosure and a 'use this when' statement, both somewhat implied by the tool's nature and name.

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 compensate. It does add meaningful parameter semantics by saying sku_id must originate from biz_query_sales / biz_anomaly_scan and forbidding guessing. However, it does not explain the ID format, domain meaning, or how it relates to other business keys, leaving some semantic 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 a specific verb and resource: '按 sku_id 取商品维表' (get product dimension table by sku_id). The tool name and resource also distinguish it from siblings like biz_get_order and biz_query_sales. It does not explicitly contrast with those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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 gives an explicit usage rule: sku_id must come from biz_query_sales / biz_anomaly_scan and must not be guessed. This is strong directive guidance. It does not articulate when to prefer this tool over alternatives, but for a simple lookup the provenance constraint largely fulfills the usage-guideline role.

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