baidu_plant

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

The description discloses cost ($0.02/call) and free call limit (5/5 today), which are useful behavioral traits. However, it does not describe what the tool does beyond recognition (e.g., returns species list, confidence scores), and no annotations are provided to fill gaps.

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, with no unnecessary words. Information is front-loaded with the [Vision] tag and pricing. However, the brevity omits important details, so it's not optimal.

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 tool has one parameter and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the response format, accepted image types, or potential errors. The pricing info is helpful but insufficient for an agent to understand what the tool returns.

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', with a clear description specifying it expects a plant image URL. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 states it performs plant recognition (植物识别), distinguishing it from sibling tools like baidu_animal and baidu_car. However, it does not specify what information is returned (e.g., species name, confidence), which slightly reduces clarity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The name and [Vision] tag imply usage for plant images, but there is no mention of image requirements (e.g., format, size) or when not to use.

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