显示协作 AI 选择条

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

The annotations already state readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, lowering the burden. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: it says the selector appears in the current conversation and that the selection persists and affects subsequent start_workflow calls. There is no direct contradiction with the read-only hint.

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 compact sentence with no wasted words. The display action is front-loaded, followed immediately by the key behavioral consequence for start_workflow.

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 low-complexity, two-parameter, read-only UI selector with no output schema, the description covers the core action and downstream effect. It remains incomplete on routing versus sibling preference tools and does not clarify how the mentioned reasoning-strength selector maps to the available input parameters.

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 description coverage is 50%; 'workspace' is documented in the schema, while 'primary_agent' has no schema description. The description mentions model and reasoning-strength selection, but the schema only exposes 'primary_agent', and the enum values (auto, codex, claude) are not explained. It adds some conceptual context but does not fully compensate for the missing parameter documentation.

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 a specific verb ('显示') and resource ('协作 AI 模型与推理强度选择条') in a clear context ('在当前对话中'). It also names a downstream dependency ('start_workflow'), but it does not differentiate itself from sibling tools such as set_partner_preferences, set_collaboration_mode, or open_sidebar.

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 usage by saying the selection will be saved and used in later start_workflow calls, which suggests it should be invoked before a workflow. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and does not mention alternative sibling tools for setting preferences or collaboration mode.

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