App Sac Store List

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: no statement that this is a read-only listing, no auth/profile requirements, no note on whether host/port/scheme must resolve to a reachable NAS, and no indication of result scope or pagination.

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 zero filler. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity is arguably under-specification rather than true conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and all four params are optional with documented defaults. What is missing is any hint of context an agent needs to pick this tool — what 'SAC' means and how it relates to the other app-store listing siblings.

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 all four parameters (host, port, scheme, profile) are already documented in the schema with defaults and examples. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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?

States a verb (获取) and resource (SAC 应用商店列表), and the parenthetical hints at the data's nature (应用推荐数据源). However, 'SAC' is never defined, and the description gives no way to distinguish this from the sibling app_store_list or app_store_latest_release — the agent cannot tell why one list endpoint would be chosen over the other.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance at all. With app_store_list, app_store_search, and app_store_latest_release as siblings, the absence of any routing signal is a real gap.

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