max

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states what the tool does but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like error handling (e.g., what happens with empty arrays or non-numeric elements), performance characteristics, or return format. The description is minimal and lacks operational context.

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, efficient sentence in Chinese that directly states the tool's function. It's front-loaded with no wasted words, making it highly concise and well-structured for its simple purpose.

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's low complexity (one parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover parameter details, error cases, or return values. While concise, it lacks necessary context for reliable use, especially with 0% schema coverage and no behavioral disclosure.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'array' which aligns with the 'numbers' parameter, but doesn't explain the parameter's semantics (e.g., that it expects numeric values, handles mixed types, or requires non-empty arrays). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema's structural information.

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 '找出数组中的最大值' (find the maximum value in an array) clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('find') and resource ('array'), and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'min' (which finds the minimum). However, it doesn't explicitly mention that it operates on numeric arrays, though this is implied.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'min' for finding minimum values, 'mean' for averages, or other statistical functions. There's no context about appropriate use cases or limitations.

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