list_caches

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses read-only behavior ('只读'), BFS traversal, and the max_nodes limit, which are important safety and algorithmic traits. It does not explain return format or the meaning of 'whitelisted', but for a simple listing tool this 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 concise sentence that front-loads the key action and scope, with no filler words. Every part adds value.

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 listing tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action, safety, and limitations. However, missing details about the whitelist definition and the parent_path parameter make it incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter semantics. It only clarifies max_nodes as a limit; ctx and parent_path remain unexplained. This is insufficient for full parameter understanding.

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 '枚举白名单 File Cache 节点' specifically states the action (enumerate) and resource (whitelisted File Cache nodes), with additional details about BFS and max_nodes limit. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_children or list_node_types.

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 implies usage as a read-only enumeration tool but does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or mention alternatives. It mentions BFS and max_nodes, which gives context, but no exclusions or comparison to related cache tools.

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