list_takes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and explicitly states '只读不改场景' (read-only, does not modify scene), which is a key behavioral disclosure. It also lists return fields, but lacks details on permissions, performance, or edge cases.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every word serves a purpose. No redundant or irrelevant information is present.

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 description covers the main functionality and return fields, making it clear for a simple list tool. However, the total absence of context for the 'ctx' parameter and the lack of any detail on expected behavior or prerequisites leaves a notable gap.

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 schema has one required parameter 'ctx' with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention it at all. There is no explanation of what 'ctx' means or how it affects the listing, leaving the agent without guidance.

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 '枚举全部 takes' (enumerate all takes), which is a specific verb+resource action. It further specifies return fields (name/path/parent/current), making it distinct from siblings like set_current_take or create_take.

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 by defining the action, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_current_take or create_take. It lacks exclusionary guidance or mention of alternative approaches.

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