yuque_get_group_repos

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

Without annotations, the description adds the permission requirement ('权限要求: read'), indicating the tool is read-only. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or other traits beyond the basic read nature.

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 concise, starting with the main purpose, followed by permission and a parameter list. Every line serves a purpose with no unnecessary text.

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 presence of an output schema (covering return values) and a simple parameter set, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, required parameter, and optional parameters. It could mention pagination behavior more explicitly, but overall it is sufficient.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description provides brief explanations for all parameters (e.g., 'login: 团队 login'), adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not specify allowed values for 'type' or explain default pagination behavior.

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 verb ('获取') and the resource ('团队的知识库列表'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like yuque_get_user_repos or yuque_get_repo. It specifies it's for a team's repo list.

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?

No guidelines are provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like yuque_get_user_repos or yuque_get_repo. The description lacks context for choosing this over alternatives.

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