list_distilleries

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the safety/behavior burden. '列出...可按产区过滤' accurately conveys a read-style filtering operation, but it doesn't disclose pagination, result shape, or how absent filters behave. These are moderate omissions for a simple list tool.

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?

One compact sentence that front-loads the purpose and appends the filter condition. Every word earns its place; no redundant filler.

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 single-optional-parameter list tool with full schema coverage, the description is nearly complete: it states the resource, scope (domestic), and filter mechanism. A brief pointer to list_regions for codes would improve it, but nothing critical is missing for a correct call.

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 already documents region as an industrial-zone code with an example (qionglai). The description mostly repeats this rather than adding new parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('列出') and resource ('国产威士忌酒厂'), and notes the optional region filter. It is distinct from siblings like get_distillery, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with them.

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?

It implies the primary use: list all distilleries, optionally filtered by an industrial-region code. It offers no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance and never points to list_regions for obtaining valid codes, though that is inferable.

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