get_token_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the API endpoint (GET /v1/token/info) and the return structure, and uses '查詢' to imply a read-only operation. However, it doesn't explicitly state there are no side effects or mention any auth requirements for the call itself.

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 well-structured with clear headings (用途, 呼叫的 Shopline API, 回傳結構). It is concise yet informative, with every section adding value 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?

For a zero-parameter read-only tool, the description covers the purpose, use case, underlying API endpoint, and return structure fields. Since there is no output schema, this description adequately compensates.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. No additional parameter semantics are needed, and the description appropriately focuses on the return structure.

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 specific verbs '取得/查詢' and clearly states it retrieves the current API token's information including merchant, scopes, and expiry. This is unique among siblings, all of which focus on other domains, making it easy to distinguish.

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?

Explicitly describes use cases: troubleshooting API access issues and verifying token permissions. This gives clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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