seedance_list_actions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It accurately describes a read-only operation that returns a categorized list, with no side effects. The return format is specified, providing adequate transparency.

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 concise: two sentences plus a return line. The first sentence immediately states the purpose, and the structure is front-loaded with no wasted words.

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 no input parameters and the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description adequately informs the agent that it returns a categorized list. It is complete for a simple discovery tool, though the output schema could provide further detail.

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 tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information. Baseline 4 is appropriate as there is no omission.

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 lists all available Seedance API actions and corresponding tools, acting as a reference guide. This specific verb+resource combination effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on generating videos or listing models/resolutions.

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 explains it is 'helpful for understanding the full capabilities' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance. The usage context is implied but not directive.

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