Diagnose Lazada Connection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying that no browser is launched and no connection to Lazada is made, reinforcing the annotation signals without contradicting them.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, then adds the key scoping constraint. Every word earns its place and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 the tool's simplicity, zero parameters, rich annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. Nothing important is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter burden for the description to carry. The baseline for no-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter-related text.

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 states the exact action ('Read') and the specific resources ('service version and browser mode'), and it explicitly distinguishes itself from connection-oriented tools by noting it does not launch a browser or connect to Lazada. This clearly separates it from siblings like 'login' and 'start_login'.

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 implies this is a safe diagnostic read that can be used without establishing a connection, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or when not to use it. The negative constraints ('without launching a browser or connecting to Lazada') give context but no direct routing to or away from sibling tools.

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