get_shipment_detail

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

No annotations are present, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states 'view details,' implying a read operation, but fails to disclose authorization requirements, rate limits, or whether the response is cached or live. The minimal description does not adequately compensate for missing annotations.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded with the action. It contains no unnecessary words. While it could benefit from additional context, it is efficiently structured.

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?

The description is minimal for a detail retrieval tool. It does not specify what information is included in the response (e.g., status, addresses, items), nor does it mention pagination, response length, or error conditions. Given the lack of output schema, the description should provide more completeness.

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 full coverage (100%) for the single parameter shipment_no, with its description '运单号.' The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 clearly indicates the tool's function: '查看运单详细信息' (view shipment detail information). The verb '查看' specifies a read operation, and '运单详细信息' identifies the resource. While it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like get_order_detail or track_shipment, the name and description are specific enough to imply retrieval of shipment-level details.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_shipments or track_shipment. The description lacks any context about use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer applicability only from the tool name and sibling list.

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