getMapStatList

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only restates authentication requirements already present in the schema (token, userAgent) and provides no detail on output formatting, pagination, side effects, or operational behavior. No added context beyond the schema.

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, front-loaded with the main verb and resource, and contains no filler words. It is concise, though it sacrifices detail for brevity in a way that affects other dimensions.

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 list-returning tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is under-specified. It does not clarify what 'statistics' includes, the result structure, ordering, pagination, or any operational details needed for correct invocation and interpretation.

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 coverage is 100% with all four parameters documented, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter semantics beyond the schema; it simply mentions token and userAgent, which are already described.

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 states the tool retrieves a user map statistics list from the Shendao platform ('获取神岛平台用户地图统计列表'). It uses a clear verb+resource, but it does not distinguish from sibling tools like getMapPlayerStatList, leaving potential ambiguity about the exact type of statistics.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only additional note ('需Token和用户请求头') merely repeats schema requirements and does not address selection criteria, exclusions, or comparison with sibling tools.

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