list_bones

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb '列出' (list) strongly implies a read-only operation, and the description mentions optional pose data, but it does not explicitly state that the tool has no side effects or that it does not modify the armature.

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 concise, front-loaded with the primary action, and each clause adds meaningful detail without redundancy. It efficiently communicates the tool's core behavior and optional mode.

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 simple listing tool, the description covers the essential output categories and the optional pose behavior. It does not specify return format or error cases, but these are not critical for such a straightforward operation.

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 pose parameter is explained well with 'pose=true 附带姿态变换与约束', but the required armature parameter is not described beyond its name. Since the schema provides no descriptions, the armature parameter's meaning and expected format remain implicit.

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 lists bones along with key attributes such as head/tail, parent/child relationships, and deformation status, and explains that pose=true adds pose transforms and constraints. This makes the tool's purpose specific and distinguishes it from sibling bone-related tools like add_bone, set_bone, or remove_bone.

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 when to use the tool—whenever bone information is needed—but it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it. The context is clear enough, yet explicit usage guidance is missing.

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