list_sticker_sets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. However, it only states the tool lists sticker packs and does not mention that it is read-only, what the output format is, or any side effects. This is minimal 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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately front-loaded and to the point.

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 there are no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is largely complete. It explains the primary purpose. However, it could explicitly mention that it returns a list of stickers sets, but the output schema likely covers that.

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, and according to the guidelines, the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema, but since no parameters exist, it is adequate.

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 that the tool lists sticker packs the user has added ('列出自己已添加的贴纸包'). It provides a specific verb+resource combination, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_sticker_set (which retrieves a specific set) and send_sticker (which sends a sticker).

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons with sibling tools like get_sticker_set, which could be used to check individual sets.

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