列出 i18n 替换配置

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and usefully discloses account scoping, the deliberate exclusion of configJson content, and the authentication prerequisite. It does not describe return shape or errors, but for a zero-parameter read-only list this is acceptable.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then adds only two necessary details: the configJson exclusion and the environment variable requirement. No filler or redundancy.

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, it covers what is returned, the account scope, the data exclusion, and setup requirements. It would be slightly stronger if it routed the agent to get_profile for configJson, but nothing essential for calling it successfully is missing.

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?

There are no input parameters, so the description has no parameter semantics to add beyond the empty schema. It does mention the only external input (I18N_API_KEY), which is extra context beyond the schema.

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 names a specific action (列出 'list'), a concrete resource (替换配置 on the i18n platform), and a scope (当前账号). Explicitly excluding configJson content also distinguishes it from profile-detail operations like get_profile.

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?

It gives clear context for when to invoke the tool: to list the current account's saved replacement configurations. It also states the required environment-variable setup (I18N_API_KEY), though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use cases.

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