wb_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It clearly states a listing operation and indicates a fixed catalog of 7 items, which conveys a read-only intent. However, it does not disclose whether the list is cached, whether network access is required, or what the output structure contains, leaving some behavioral details unspecified.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, includes the useful count, and every word earns its place.

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 tool with an output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It tells the agent exactly what will be listed and how many items to expect. It does not explicitly connect to wb_data as the follow-up data-fetch tool, but the naming and clarity of '列出' make the tool's role understandable within the sibling set.

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 tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are trivially complete. The baseline for a parameterless tool is 4, and the description adds no conflicting or missing parameter information.

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 uses a specific verb '列出' (list) with a clear resource: '所有可采集的世界银行数据集' and even states the exact count ('共7个'). This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling tools like wb_data, which is clearly about fetching data rather than listing datasets.

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 phrase '可采集的' implies the tool is used to enumerate available datasets before collecting data, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as wb_data. Usage context is only implied, not stated, so the guideline is adequate but not strong.

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