list_novels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It transparently conveys that this is a read-only listing operation scoped to the current account, and it lists the output fields. It does not mention ordering, pagination, or auth prerequisites, but for a simple list tool the disclosed behavior is adequate.

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 sentence that wastes no words. It front-loads the listing scope, includes the expected output, and ends with a practical usage tip.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it states scope, response fields, and the intended use case. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 the description needs to add no parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 applies because there is nothing ambiguous about invoking an input-free tool.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('列出') with a clear resource ('当前账号下的所有小说') and enumerates the returned fields. It is easily distinguishable from siblings like list_chapters or get_novel_stats, which target different scopes or data.

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 explicitly states when to use it: when handling multiple novels and needing to select an operation target. It could be slightly stronger by naming alternatives, but the usage context is clear and actionable.

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