list_vendor_actions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the HTTP method (GET), which implies read-only, but does not mention required authentication, response format, pagination, or any other behavioral traits. This is insufficient.

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 that includes both the action and the endpoint. It is front-loaded and contains no filler or extraneous information.

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?

For a zero-parameter list operation, the description conveys the core purpose and endpoint, but lacks any additional context such as what the returned list contains or typical use cases. With no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate but has clear gaps.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. The schema coverage is effectively 100% as there are no properties to document.

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 '取得廠商權限列表 (GET /v1/vendors/actions)' clearly states the operation (get/vendor permission list) and includes the exact REST endpoint, which disambiguates it from sibling tools like list_vendor_roles or list_vendor_role_actions. The verb and resource are 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no context, and no exclusions. It is a bare statement of what it does, without situating it among the many sibling list tools.

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