scan_media_files

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While '扫描' implies a read operation, it doesn't specify whether this is recursive, what file formats are supported, whether it modifies files, what happens with permissions errors, or what the output format will be. For a scanning tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

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, efficient sentence in Chinese that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple scanning tool and front-loads the core action ('扫描') and target resources. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 scanning tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what constitutes a successful scan, what information is returned about found files, how errors are handled, or whether there are any limitations (file size, depth, permissions). The agent lacks crucial context about the tool's behavior and outputs despite the simple parameter structure.

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 description coverage is 100% with the single parameter 'directory' well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond what's already in the schema - it mentions '指定目录' (specified directory) which aligns with the schema's '要扫描的目录路径' (directory path to scan). No additional parameter context, constraints, or examples are provided beyond the structured schema documentation.

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 action ('扫描' - scan) and target resources ('视频和字幕文件' - video and subtitle files) with a specific scope ('指定目录中' - in specified directory). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_config_summary or rename_subtitles by focusing on file scanning rather than configuration or renaming operations. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from preview_matching which might also involve file examination.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites, when-not-to-use scenarios, or comparison with sibling tools like preview_matching or rename_subtitles. The agent must infer usage context solely from the tool name and description without explicit direction.

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