novel_import

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It usefully states that scan is a non-writing preview and apply performs the import, and that files can be copied or moved, but it omits important mutation details such as overwrite behavior, conflict handling, and permission requirements for a bulk-write operation.

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, front-loaded sentence that packs a lot of information efficiently. The parenthetical mode summary is terse but functional; nothing is redundant or wasted.

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 7-parameter import tool with no output schema, the description covers the main workflow but omits the return format of scan, error behavior, and edge cases like duplicate book names. The schema descriptions compensate partially, but the description alone is not fully sufficient.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about grouping and the scan/apply modes, but it does not expand on parameter syntax or default behavior beyond what the schema already documents.

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 names a specific action (批量导入原稿件) and describes the mechanism: scanning a folder, identifying book/chapter names, grouping, and copying/moving to novels/<书名>/. This is clearly distinct from all sibling tools, none of which perform bulk import, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from any sibling by name.

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?

It clearly explains the two operational modes: scan for preview and apply for execution, giving the agent enough context to choose the right mode. It does not mention alternative tools or exclusions, but no sibling tool offers comparable functionality, so the guidance is effectively complete.

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