list_chapters

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

无 annotations，描述承担了行为披露责任。它补充了“含定时待发/已发布状态”以及“不传 book_id 用当前选中的小说”这两个关键行为特征，超出了工具名本身能推断的信息。

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?

描述仅两句话，没有冗余信息。先点明操作对象和范围，再补充状态信息和参数默认行为，结构紧凑且信息密度高。

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?

工具复杂度低，只有一个可选参数且无 output schema。描述已覆盖功能、返回状态信息和默认参数行为，足以让智能体能正确选择并调用。

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 已说明 book_id 为可选字符串，描述进一步补充了省略时的默认行为，即使用当前选中的小说。这比单纯标注“可选”更有指导意义。

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?

描述使用明确动词“列出”，资源为“小说各分卷下的章节”，并补充了包含定时待发/已发布状态，清楚区分于 list_novels 等兄弟工具。功能边界一目了然。

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?

描述了核心使用方式：不传 book_id 时使用当前选中的小说，给出了参数省略时的明确行为。虽未直接列举替代工具，但结合工具名和上下文，使用场景足够清晰。

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