get_logger_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the return value is '暂未实现' (not yet implemented), which is a critical behavioral disclosure about incomplete functionality. However, it lacks other important details like whether this requires specific permissions, if it's read-only, error conditions, or performance characteristics.

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 reasonably concise with a brief purpose statement followed by parameter and return documentation. However, the structure includes implementation notes ('暂未实现') that might be better placed elsewhere, and the purpose statement could be more front-loaded with essential context.

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 2 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'logger information' includes, how the data is structured, error handling, or prerequisites. The note about unimplemented returns adds some context but leaves major gaps for effective use.

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, the description provides meaningful parameter semantics beyond the schema. It explains that 'pid' is a process ID as a string and 'name' is an optional logger name, clarifying that omitting 'name' returns all logger information. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 states '获取logger信息' (get logger information), which provides a basic verb+resource but is vague about scope. It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'set_logger_level' or explain what 'logger information' specifically entails. The purpose is understandable but lacks specificity.

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 description mentions that if 'name' is not specified, it gets all logger information, but doesn't provide context about when to filter by name or when this tool is appropriate compared to other logging/monitoring tools in the sibling list.

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