time_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavior disclosure. It indicates a read operation via '查询' and states the return value (total minutes), but it does not explicitly confirm side-effect-free behavior or mention any required permissions or limitations.

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 sentence that directly states the action, filter criteria, and output. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, earning a perfect score for efficiency.

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?

The tool has three optional parameters and an output schema, so the description does not need to detail return structure. It covers what the tool does and its primary filtering dimensions, which is sufficient for a simple query tool, though it lacks any caveats or usage boundaries.

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?

Since the schema has no descriptions, the description compensates by explaining that parameters item_id and the date range (date_from/date_to) serve as filters. It does not cover parameter formats or detailed semantics, but it provides essential meaning for an agent to use the tool.

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 queries work time records with a specific verb (查询) and resource (工时记录). It also mentions filtering capabilities, making its purpose clear even without comparing to sibling tools.

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 implies usage for querying time records with optional filters by item_id and date range. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like report_daily or todo_list, nor does it state when to prefer this tool over alternatives.

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