cmw_memory_catalog

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

The description '查询' (query) aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation, indicating a non-destructive read operation. However, it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits beyond what the annotation already provides, such as error handling or response format.

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 extremely concise (one short sentence), but it sacrifices essential information. While brevity is valued, here it results in under-specification, making it minimally adequate.

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?

Given the tool has two optional parameters and an output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not cover what the directory listing contains, how parameters affect results, or any return behavior, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 0%, and the description fails to explain the two parameters 'alias' and 'params_json'. Without any clarification, the agent cannot infer their meaning or usage, which severely hampers correct invocation.

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 '查询仪器内部文件目录' (query instrument internal file directory) clearly indicates the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate it from sibling tools, many of which also deal with CMW instrument operations.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or scenarios, leaving the agent to infer usage without support.

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