cat_aliases

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 action ('获取别名列表' - get alias list) without detailing permissions required, rate limits, pagination, error handling, or what the output looks like. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is insufficient to inform safe and effective use.

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 brief and structured with a clear purpose statement followed by a parameter list, making it easy to scan. There's no unnecessary verbosity, and it uses minimal sentences. However, the lack of detail limits its effectiveness, but it's not overly wordy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (likely querying aliases in a system like Elasticsearch), no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete parameter documentation, the description is inadequate. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects, output format, or usage context, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 description includes a parameter section noting 'name: 别名名称（可选）' (name: alias name (optional)), which adds meaning beyond the input schema's 0% coverage. However, it doesn't explain the parameter's purpose (e.g., filtering aliases by name), format, or constraints. With one parameter and low schema coverage, this provides basic but incomplete compensation.

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 '获取别名列表' (Get alias list) restates the tool name 'cat_aliases' in Chinese, making it a tautology. It doesn't specify what kind of aliases (e.g., Elasticsearch index aliases) or provide context about the resource being accessed. While it includes a verb ('获取' - get) and resource ('别名列表' - alias list), it lacks differentiation from sibling tools like 'alias_get' or 'alias_actions'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions. With sibling tools like 'alias_get' and 'alias_actions' available, there's no indication of how this tool differs or when it should be preferred, leaving usage unclear.

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