baidu_ingredient

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pricing ($0.02/call) and rate (5 free per day), which is a behavioral trait, but it fails to mention whether the tool is read-only, what it requires (e.g., image format constraints), or any side effects. The lack of behavioral detail limits transparency.

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 very concise: a single line conveying purpose and pricing. Every part is relevant and not wasteful. However, it lacks structure (e.g., separate sections) and includes non-functional info (pricing) that could be external, but the conciseness is effective.

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?

Given the simplicity (1 param, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., a list of ingredient names, confidence scores), how to interpret results, or any limitations. For a vision recognition tool, the agent needs more context to handle the response correctly.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'image' (described as '果蔬图片URL'). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates the tool's purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already sufficiently describes the parameter.

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 explicitly states '果蔬识别' (fruit and vegetable recognition), indicating a specific verb (recognize) and resource (ingredients). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like baidu_plant (plants) and baidu_dish (dishes). However, it lacks an explicit verb in English and does not elaborate on the scope beyond fruits and vegetables.

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 baidu_dish or baidu_plant. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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