list_servers

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

No annotations provided, and the description merely says 'list' without disclosing any behavioral traits (e.g., read-only, authentication needs, or special conditions).

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, zero waste; perfectly concise for a tool with no parameters.

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?

Description is minimal but sufficient given the presence of an output schema (not shown) and no parameters; however, it could mention what happens when no servers are configured.

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?

No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100% (empty schema), so baseline of 3 applies; description adds no extra 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?

Description clearly states 'List all configured servers' (列出所有已配置的服务器), using a specific verb (list) and resource (servers), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like remove_server or set_server_url.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives; the description only states what it does without context or exclusion conditions.

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