describe_api

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

Without annotations, the description partially compensates by noting that the tool returns '精简信息' (concise information) and for Query APIs only core parameters and queryableFields. However, it does not disclose safety traits (e.g., read-only nature), auth requirements, or error handling.

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 with two short sentences plus a returns line. Every sentence is essential and front-loaded with the purpose. No wasted verbiage.

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's simplicity, the description is fairly complete. It mentions the return format (concise info) and a special case (Query APIs). The presence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return fields. However, it lacks context on prerequisites or typical use scenarios.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds value by providing an example ('如 'QueryVmInstance'') for the 'api_name' parameter, which clarifies the expected format beyond the schema's title. This helps in choosing the correct value.

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 the tool's purpose: to get detailed parameter descriptions for a specified ZStack API. It uses a specific verb ('获取') and resource ('API 的详细参数说明'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'execute_api' and 'search_api' by its focus on description.

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 use when needing parameter details for a specific API, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like 'search_api' or 'execute_api'. No exclusions or when-not guidance are provided.

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