list_dop_objects

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states READ_ONLY, pagination, returns only name/object_id with bounded summaries, does not expand simulated data, and applies a response cap. These are concrete behavioral traits beyond the tool name and schema.

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 compact and front-loaded: three sentences deliver the primary action, output scope, and behavioral caveats without redundancy. It uses technical precision and no filler.

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?

The tool has no annotations and no output schema, so the description must cover both behavior and return shape. It adequately describes pagination and response caps, but misses parameter semantics and exact return value structure beyond the field summary. Adequate for a listing tool but with clear gaps.

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%, yet the description does not explain any of the four parameters (ctx, dop_path, limit, offset). '分页' hints at limit/offset, but their types, defaults, and required context (ctx, dop_path) are undocumented in either schema or description.

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 clearly states the tool's function: '分页列出 DOP objects' (paginated list of DOP objects), identifying both the verb (list) and the resource (DOP objects). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_dop_object by specifying it returns only summaries, not expanded 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 implies a listing use case and highlights pagination and limited field returns, but does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives like get_dop_object or get_dop_field. There is no explicit 'when not to use' or reference to sibling tools for detailed lookups.

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