ruyi_list_scripts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only mentions URL filtering, which is also in the schema. It does not state whether this is a read-only operation, how dynamic scripts are handled, or what the return format looks like.

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?

A single concise sentence front-loads the main action. No filler words; the filtering capability is stated directly.

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 is simple but the description omits explanation of the 'pageIdx' parameter and the expected return structure. Since there is no output schema, more detail would be helpful. However, the core purpose is clear.

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 covers the 'filter' parameter with a description, but 'pageIdx' has no description and the description text does not elaborate it. With 50% coverage, the description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 action ('list'), the resource ('JavaScript script URLs'), and the scope ('loaded in the page'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ruyi_list_preload_scripts by specifying loaded scripts, and from ruyi_get_script_source which retrieves source code.

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 for listing script URLs but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like ruyi_get_script_source or ruyi_search_in_sources. No exclusions or conditions are provided, so it relies on the agent inferring the appropriate context.

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