list_services

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It hints at a read operation ('轻量摘要') but does not state safety, authorization needs, side effects, or output format. This is insufficient for an AI agent to understand implications.

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 concise sentence with no extraneous content. However, its brevity omits essential details, making it slightly under-specified rather than efficiently clear. Nonetheless, it avoids verbosity.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain what constitutes a 'lightweight summary' or how the optional 'server' parameter filters results. The tool is simple, but the description still lacks sufficient detail for reliable agent use.

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 one parameter 'server' with 0% described coverage. The description does not explain what 'server' means or how it affects results. Since schema coverage is low, the description should compensate but fails to add any 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 clearly states the tool retrieves a list of agent services as a lightweight summary ('获取可用的 Agent 服务列表（轻量摘要）'). The verb '获取' (get) and resource '服务列表' (service list) are specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_servers, leaving some ambiguity.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, such as when to prefer list_services over list_servers or discover.

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