prefetch_content

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits like whether it triggers origin fetches, takes time, incurs costs, or has rate limits. For a mutating operation, this is insufficient.

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?

Single sentence, no waste. However, it is too minimal; it could include brief but useful context (e.g., 'preloads content to specified region/country') without adding fluff. Adequate but not optimal.

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?

Despite 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description fails to provide context about the operation's behavior, lifecycle, or how to verify results (e.g., query_prefetch_status). For a tool with 3 required params and no annotations, this is very incomplete.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema already documents parameters adequately.

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?

Description clearly states the action (预热/preheat) and resource (内容到CDN边缘节点). It distinguishes from sibling tools like purge_content and query_prefetch_status, though no explicit differentiation is provided. The verb and resource are specific.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites, such as needing a valid domain or CDN configuration, nor does it contrast with purge_content or query_prefetch_status.

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