list_reports

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a real behavioral detail: the page size is fixed at 20 items. However, it says nothing about what the filters do when combined, whether date filtering is inclusive, or what happens past the schema's page cap of 10000.

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?

Two short clauses with no filler, and the purpose is stated first. The text is efficient but the terseness comes at the cost of the parameter documentation that is needed most.

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?

With 9 optional parameters, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description should explain what each filter does and what the result rows contain. It only names three returned fields and the page size, which is inadequate for a tool with this many filter dimensions.

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 0% across 9 parameters, so the description carries the full burden, and it does not meet it. '日期按统计窗口筛选' only vaguely gestures at date_from and date_to, and the description leaves type, format, report_source, version_id, and release_id (a 64-hex pattern) completely unexplained.

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 uses '找' (find) and '已上线报告' (published reports) to name a concrete verb and a constrained resource scope. The sibling tool get_report means the singular/plural, list/detail distinction is mostly implied by names, but the description never explicitly states that this is the listing step before get_report.

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 never says when to use this instead of get_report, but the closing phrase '从结果取得report_id、release_id和dataset_revision' implicitly signals that this is a discovery step whose output feeds follow-up detail calls. Usage is inferable rather than stated, and there are no exclusions or prerequisites.

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