描述 DSH worker 能力

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by disclosing the actual payload contents (version, entry, defaults, limits), which is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs to decide whether to call it first.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the returned content and closes with the caller benefit. No redundant restatement of the title and no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description must convey return values, and it does so by listing the four categories of information returned. It is complete for a simple introspection tool, though it could note whether the result is static or reflects live worker state.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. No misleading parameter claims are made.

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 uses a specific verb (返回) and enumerates the concrete resources returned: worker version, DSH entry point, default parameters, and limits. This clearly separates it from action-oriented siblings like dsh_run or dsh_status, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 '便于 leader 自适应调用方式' implies the tool should be consulted before invoking the worker so the caller can adapt its call style, which is useful implied guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement and no named alternative among the twelve siblings.

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