List imported reading materials from your DeepTutor instance to see available documents for study. Quickly identify resources to review or select for learning workflows.
List imported reading materials
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes | 原始 DeepTutor 工具返回值；其具体字段由对应 DeepTutor API 决定。 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the 'imported' scope qualifier; it does not describe pagination, ordering, or other behavioral details, but for a simple read-only list with an output schema this is minimally acceptable.
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 a single clear sentence with no wasted words. It states the operation and resource efficiently.
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 no parameters, read-only annotations, and an existing output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. However, it lacks any context about what counts as 'imported reading materials' or how this tool relates to sibling list/get tools, leaving an agent to infer the intended use case.
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 input schema has no properties, and schema_description_coverage is effectively 100% because there are no parameters to document. The description has no need to elaborate on parameter meaning.
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 clear verb and resource: 'List imported reading materials.' It is distinguishable from get_reading_material and list_reading_bookmarks, but 'reading materials' is left undefined relative to similar tools like list_books, so it does not fully achieve sibling differentiation.
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 guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_books, get_reading_material, or list_reading_bookmarks. The description does not state prerequisites, expected context, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.