get_selection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds '只读/Read-only' but this mostly repeats the annotation rather than revealing new behavior. It does clarify that the tool returns a list plus summaries, which is useful but not extensive.

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 compact: two short parallel sentences in Chinese and English conveying the same essential information. There is no fluff, redundant examples, or unnecessary detail.

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 simple, zero-parameter, read-only getter, the description adequately explains what the tool returns and that it is safe. It could specify the exact shape of the summary or how to distinguish this from get_object_info, but the core information an agent needs to invoke it is present.

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, so parameter semantics are trivially complete; the empty schema and 100% coverage mean there is nothing undocumented. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed.

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 a specific verb and resource: '返回当前选择的对象列表及概要' / 'Return the current selection with summaries.' This clearly distinguishes it from broader listing tools like list_objects and from get_object_info by anchoring on the current selection.

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 context is clear: use this when you need the current selection's objects and summaries. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the zero-parameter signature and read-only nature make the intended usage obvious.

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