routine_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('List all') but does not mention critical details like pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or what 'all' entails (e.g., active vs. inactive). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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?

Given the tool's complexity as a list operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the output includes (e.g., routine IDs, names, statuses) or behavioral aspects like ordering or limits, which are crucial for an agent to use it effectively.

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 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately does not add parameter details, avoiding redundancy. A baseline of 4 is applied as it efficiently handles the lack of parameters without over-explaining.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('Edge Routines (ERs) in your Alibaba Cloud account'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'er_record_list' or 'routine_get', which might cause confusion about scope or detail level.

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, such as 'er_record_list' for records within a routine or 'routine_get' for details of a specific routine. It lacks context about prerequisites, timing, or exclusions, leaving usage unclear.

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