list_user_okrs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the need for an open_id but does not discuss pagination behavior, potential errors, rate limits, or the fact that this is a read-only operation. The description adds minimal safety or behavioral context.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the critical information ('[Official API + UAT] List a user's OKRs') and avoids unnecessary detail. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 the tool has 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It omits explanations of pagination (offset/limit), response format, error handling, and default behaviors. An agent would need to infer many details from the schema alone, which is incomplete for a production tool.

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 100%, so the schema already describes all parameters. The description mentions 'open_id' and 'period_ids' but adds no new semantic meaning beyond what is in the schema. This meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'List a user's OKRs' with a specific verb and resource. It adds the note about being official API and UAT. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_okrs', which may have overlapping functionality.

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 provides a prerequisite ('Requires the user's open_id') and a usage hint for filtering by period_ids. But it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives like 'get_okrs' or 'list_okr_progress_records'.

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