szlcsc_library_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates the search is offline and filters on CAD/archived assets, which is useful. However, it does not mention return limits, pagination, or performance characteristics. It does not contradict any annotations since none exist.

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 concise sentence covering the main purpose and filter dimensions. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could be slightly more structured with lists or examples for clarity.

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 14 parameters, an output schema, and many siblings, the description provides basic completeness by naming filter dimensions. However, it lacks information on what the output contains, how results are sorted, or how to effectively use the many filters. It is adequate for a search tool but not fully comprehensive.

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?

The description lists multiple filter dimensions (型号/品牌/封装/分类/库存/CAD与归档资产) that map to the 14 parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by stating the filtering capabilities, but it does not explain individual parameter usage or behavior (e.g., library_root default, sort_by options).

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 it is for offline searching of a long-term component library by multiple criteria (model/brand/package/category/inventory/CAD/archive assets). The verb '检索' (search) and resource '长期器件库' are specific, and it distinguishes this tool from its siblings, which are for downloading, parametric search, compare, etc.

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 for searching within the offline library with various filters, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like szlcsc_search or szlcsc_parametric_search. It provides no guidance on when not to use it or mention of typical parameters to set.

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