检查 ENVI Classic 5.6 环境

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by detailing what is read (registry and installation files) and the purpose (confirming safe startup), which goes beyond the annotations. However, it does not describe potential edge cases like missing files or permission issues, but that is not required given the read-only nature.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the action and target. It is front-loaded and contains no redundant information, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 low complexity (zero parameters), rich annotations (read-only, idempotent), and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It specifies exactly what the tool examines (registry and installation files) and the goal (safe startup confirmation), which is sufficient for the agent to understand the tool's role in the workflow.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema has no properties. The description correctly focuses on the tool's behavior rather than parameter details. With no parameters to explain, the description fully covers the semantics needed for the agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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: reading the local registry and installation files to confirm whether ENVI Classic 5.6 (64-bit) can be safely started. The verb '读取' (read) and resource '注册表和安装文件' (registry and installation files) are specific, and the intent to verify safe startup distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'envi_classic_launch' which actually starts the application.

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 implies the health check should be used before launching ENVI Classic, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or mention alternatives. No when-not-to-use conditions or exclusions are given, so guidance is limited to what the tool name and description suggest.

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