private_domain_find_reference

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states 'excludes 作废' and 'latest', but does not clarify whether the tool returns one or multiple results, whether it mutates data, or if it requires specific permissions. The description is too minimal for safe autonomous invocation.

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 concise—two sentences—with the main function front-loaded. However, the use of Chinese characters ('私域', '作废') may require translation effort, slightly reducing efficiency. Overall, every sentence adds value.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should indicate what is returned (e.g., IDs, names, expiration). It mentions 'activity + coupon' but no structure. Sibling tools suggest copy operations expect specific references. The description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's contract.

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 50% with only country having a description. The description adds no extra meaning to the channel parameter (enum WX/WA) beyond what the schema provides, nor does it explain the default or when to choose one. For parameters with enums, more context could help the agent select 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 'Find latest activity + coupon for a country', specifying the verb, resource, and scope. The Chinese characters and term '私域' may reduce clarity for non-Chinese users, but the overall purpose is understandable and distinguishes it from siblings like activity_get or coupon_template_list.

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 phrase 'Use before copy' provides a usage hint linking it to copy operations, which aligns with sibling tools like activity_copy_save. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives, leaving the agent to infer context.

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