yapi_import_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It doesn't disclose if this is a mutating operation (likely yes), permission requirements, rate limits, or side effects (e.g., overwriting existing data). The merge parameter hints at conflict behavior, but the description doesn't elaborate.

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, efficient sentence in Chinese, front-loading the core action. However, it could be more structured by briefly mentioning key parameters or use cases without adding bulk.

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 5-parameter mutating tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral traits (e.g., idempotency, errors), output expectations, or how it differs from sibling tools, leaving gaps for agent understanding.

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 100%, so the schema documents all parameters well. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the tool name implying 'import' relates to 'json' and 'type' parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles most details.

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 '导入接口数据到 YAPI' (Import interface data to YAPI) states the action and target but is vague about scope and specifics. It doesn't differentiate from siblings like yapi_interface_add (which likely adds single interfaces) or clarify what 'interface data' entails (e.g., bulk imports from external formats).

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 versus alternatives like yapi_interface_add (for single interfaces) or yapi_interface_save/up (for updates). It mentions importing data but doesn't specify scenarios (e.g., initial setup, migration) or prerequisites (e.g., project existence).

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