get_warning_descriptions

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits (e.g., read-only, auth requirements, rate limits). The description is too minimal to inform an agent about side effects or constraints.

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 extremely concise (one phrase), but it lacks structure and clarity. While short, it does not convey sufficient information to earn its place.

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 zero parameters, no output schema, and minimal description, the tool definition leaves significant gaps. An agent cannot determine the format, ordering, or content of the returned list.

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 declares 0 parameters with 100% coverage. Since there are no parameters, the description cannot add parameter semantics, but the baseline score for zero parameters is 4.

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 '获取报警描述列表' translates to 'Get warning description list', which identifies a verb and resource. However, it is merely a phrase and does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_warnings', leaving ambiguity about what 'warning descriptions' specifically entail.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_warnings' or 'get_warning_by_id'. The description lacks any context about usage scenarios.

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