获取图片生成任务列表

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral transparency burden. It adds useful context about ordering (reverse chronological) and scope (current API Key user), but it omits pagination behavior, response format, and any rate-limit or authentication considerations.

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, front-loaded sentence that clearly states the action, resource, and ordering. It includes the endpoint reference without unnecessary fluff, making it highly concise and effective.

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 list tool with all optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential context: scope, ordering, and endpoint. However, it could be slightly more complete by mentioning what fields are included in each returned task, though this is not critical.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for all three parameters (page, status, pageSize) including defaults, minimums/maximums, and an enum. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 '返回' (return) and resource '当前 API Key 用户的图片生成任务列表', and it specifies the ordering as '按创建时间倒序' (reverse chronological). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool get_generation_task, which retrieves a single task.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided, but the scope ('current API Key user') and endpoint mapping make the listing purpose clear. The distinction from the singular get_generation_task is implied by the plural 'tasks' but not explicitly stated.

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