智能发单-跑男信息查询,查询跑腿实时信息

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose what runner data is returned (location, contact, status), whether it's real-time (implied by name only), or any latency/caching behavior. '查询' implies read-only but this is not explicit.

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?

Appropriately brief for a single-parameter tool, but contains wasteful repetition ('需要需要'). The front-loading is correct (action first), but the typo reduces clarity per the 'every sentence earns its place' standard.

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?

Insufficient for the tool ecosystem. With '获取订单详情' as a sibling, the description must clarify whether this returns runner-specific data (location, phone) vs general order metadata. No output schema exists, yet the description doesn't compensate by describing return contents.

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?

Schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter. The description mentions needing an 'order number' but adds no format details, examples, or semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema 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?

States the basic action (query runner information) and required input, but fails to differentiate from sibling '获取订单详情' (Get order details). The name suggests real-time tracking ('实时信息'), but the description omits this key scope detail.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus '获取订单详情' or other siblings. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., order status requirements) 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.