yuque_get_editor_center

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden: it usefully discloses the required cookie+ctoken authentication and the underlying GET endpoint, and enumerates the returned data. It still omits rate limits, error behavior, and any scoping caveats.

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?

Two compact sentences: the outcome list is front-loaded and the auth/endpoint detail is appended. The metric enumeration is dense but each item earns its place by telling the agent what comes back.

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 parameterless read tool with no output schema, the description is largely sufficient: it names the auth requirement, the endpoint, and the shape of the payload. Only the routing distinction from sibling statistics tools is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema requires no semantic elaboration from the description. Baseline 4 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (获取) and resource (个人编辑中心全景数据) and enumerates the metrics returned, so an agent knows exactly what it yields. It does not, however, distinguish itself from sibling statistics tools such as yuque_get_member_statistics or yuque_get_group_statistics.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance and never names an alternative, leaving the agent to infer that this is the personal-scope counterpart to the group/member statistics siblings. The only contextual hint is the auth requirement.

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