bitableListRecords

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination ('按页列出') and support for filtering/sorting, but doesn't describe authentication needs, rate limits, error conditions, or what the return format looks like. For a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 appropriately concise with a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every element (pagination, resource, supported features) earns its place without redundancy. However, the Chinese-only text might limit accessibility in some contexts.

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?

For a tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain authentication requirements, response format, error handling, or detailed parameter usage. While it covers the basic purpose, it lacks the depth needed for effective tool selection and invocation given the complexity.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions filter, field_names, and sort parameters, but doesn't explain the other 5 parameters (app_token, table_id, view_id, page_size, page_token) or provide syntax/format details. The brief mention of three parameters doesn't adequately cover the complexity of 8 total parameters.

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 tool's purpose: '按页列出某张数据表的记录' (list records of a data table by page). It specifies the resource (data table records) and verb (list by page), and distinguishes it from siblings like bitableCreateRecord and bitableUpdateRecord. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other listing tools like calendarListEvents, which would require 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions support for filter, field_names, and sort, but doesn't indicate when to use this versus other listing tools (e.g., calendarListEvents) or other bitable tools. There's no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or specific contexts for application.

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