get_export

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 查/check, which implies read-only, and adds 免费/free, but it does not describe the return format, side effects, prerequisites, or whether the export must already exist. This leaves meaningful gaps for an agent invoking the tool.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, then adds a clarifying parenthetical and the cost note. Every element earns 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?

For a single-parameter status-check tool, the description conveys the core purpose and the relevant stage of the pipeline. However, with no output schema or annotations, it does not specify return values, possible states, or invocation prerequisites, leaving the description only minimally complete for correct invocation.

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 only states episode_id is an integer greater than 0 with no description. The tool description adds that the parameter refers to '某一集' (a specific episode), which clarifies its role, but it does not explain how to obtain the episode_id or how the value maps to the export status. Partial compensation for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 (查/check) and the resource (某一集导出/母版状态, i.e., an episode's export/master status), with a parenthetical clarifying it means the downloadable master after final assembly. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_deliverables or get_final_cut, but the per-episode export-status scope is specific enough.

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 phrase '成片终拼后的可下载母版' provides a clear context for when the master is available, implying use after final assembly. However, there are no explicit alternatives, exclusions, or conditions telling an agent when to prefer this tool over related siblings such as get_deliverables.

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