Maa List

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it does not explicitly state that the call is read-only, side-effect free, or cheap. Because it has zero parameters and an output schema, the risk of misuse is low, so 'list all available' conveys most of the behavior implicitly.

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 short sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, but so terse that it omits practically all supporting context.

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?

Because an output schema exists, return values need not be described. However, for a discovery tool that sits alongside ~35 action tools, the description should tell the agent how the output connects to the rest of the toolset (for example, 'use these names with maa_run'). That link is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters, which is the baseline for a 4. No parameter explanation is needed, and the description correctly implies the call is unfiltered ('所有').

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 states a specific verb and resource ('列出' + '所有可用的预定义任务'), so an agent knows it is a listing/discovery call. It does not differentiate itself from the many sibling tools (maa_run, maa_startup, etc.), so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no indication of when to call this versus the alternatives, nor any hint that the returned predefined task names are the inputs expected by maa_run or similar execution tools. The only usage signal is the implicit 'list things' framing.

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