list_shipments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only discloses that it is a GET request, implying read-only, but does not mention pagination, filtering behavior, access requirements, or any other side effects. This is minimal disclosure.

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 extremely brief, essentially restating the tool name in Chinese and adding the endpoint. It is under-specified rather than effectively concise, omitting essential usage and behavioral context. Every word should earn its place, and here they do not.

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 has 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far too minimal. It does not explain the return value, pagination, required parameters, or how this list relates to other shipment tools. The single sentence is insufficient for a complex tool.

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 100%, so all 9 parameters have meaningful descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no parameter information, but the schema already documents each parameter, including a note that delivery_type values reference list_delivery_types. Baseline 3 applies.

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 '廠商出貨列表 (GET /v1/shipments)' clearly states the tool lists vendor shipments. It provides a specific verb and resource, but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like list_cvs_shipment_details or list_home_delivery_shipment_details, which could be more specific.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only states the endpoint without any context on appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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