List every icon in an iconfont.cn project using its Symbol JS URL, with no login required, so you can inspect available icon names before use.
List all icons in an iconfont.cn project by its Symbol URL. No login required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbolUrl | Yes | The CDN Symbol JS URL from iconfont.cn project, e.g. "https://at.alicdn.com/t/c/font_1234567_abc123.js" |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that no login is required and that the operation lists icons, but it does not explain return shape, pagination, error behavior for invalid URLs, or any rate limits.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. The login-free note is compact and no wording is wasted.
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 simple one-parameter listing tool, the description is nearly sufficient: it states the action, input source, and login requirement. It could say more about what is returned, but with such low complexity the core call requirements are covered.
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 input schema already documents the sole parameter at 100% coverage, including a CDN Symbol JS URL example. The description reinforces that the parameter is a Symbol URL but adds no meaning beyond the schema.
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 states a specific verb and resource: list all icons in an iconfont.cn project via its Symbol URL. It is clear enough to distinguish from login and download siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast with listing-oriented siblings such as l_list_all.
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 'No login required' note gives useful context for when this tool is appropriate, but the description does not name alternatives or state when not to use it. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.