get_dish_content

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states the basic operation without mentioning important behavioral aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, what happens if the dish doesn't exist, what format the detailed content returns in, or any rate limits or authentication requirements. For a lookup tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. There's no wasted language or unnecessary elaboration. It's appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool and gets straight to the point.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and minimal parameter documentation, the description is insufficiently complete. While the tool appears simple (single parameter lookup), the description doesn't address what '详细内容' (detailed content) includes, how errors are handled, or what format the response takes. The agent would need to guess about the tool's behavior and output.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 1 parameter, the description adds minimal value beyond what the schema provides. The description mentions '菜品名称' (dish name) which corresponds to the 'dishName' parameter, but provides no additional context about format expectations, character limits, or examples. The schema already indicates it's a required string parameter, so the description doesn't significantly 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 states the tool's purpose: '根据提供的菜品名称获取其详细内容' (Get detailed content based on provided dish name). It specifies the verb '获取' (get) and resource '菜品详细内容' (dish detailed content). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'get_all_dishes', which appears to be a list operation versus this lookup operation.

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. There's no mention of when to use 'get_dish_content' versus 'get_all_dishes', nor any context about prerequisites, error conditions, or appropriate use cases. The description only states what the tool does, not when to use it.

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