list_chop_channels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the output nature (names and sampling range) and implies a read-only operation via the verb '枚举', but it does not clarify the required ctx parameter or potential failure modes. This is acceptable for a benign listing, but lacks depth.

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 brief and front-loaded with purpose, but the second sentence mostly duplicates schema information and is incomplete by missing ctx. It is concise overall but not fully earning its place.

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 no output schema and zero annotation support, the description provides only a high-level outcome. Key gaps include the unexplained ctx parameter, ambiguous output_index semantics, and no return structure details. For a simple enumeration tool, this is near-minimal but still has clear omissions.

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. It mentions node_path and output_index (optional), but omits the required ctx parameter entirely. It also does not explain node_path format or output_index's expected values, despite the schema showing output_index as a string with default 0.

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 uses a specific verb '枚举' (enumerate) and clearly identifies the resource (CHOP channels/tracks) plus additional scope (sampling range). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_chop_data or export_chop_to_parm.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_chop_data or create_chop_node. There is no mention of appropriate contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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