gangtise_roadshow_list

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

No annotations exist, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only mentions the current date context and filtering capabilities, omitting details on pagination (size/fetchAll), data freshness, permissions, or rate limits. This is insufficient disclosure for a 15-param tool.

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 sentence (plus date note) that is efficient and front-loaded. It avoids unnecessary words, though the brevity sacrifices detail for some parameters.

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 15 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain robustly how the tool handles pagination (size/fetchAll), the meaning of objectList or permission, or result format. The date note partially addresses the time parameter context but overall completeness is low.

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?

With only 33% schema description coverage, the description adds value by listing some filter categories (researchAreaList, institutionList, etc.) and providing a date/time context note. However, it fails to explain opaque parameters like from, objectList, permission, and brokerTypeList, leaving gaps.

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 explicitly states the tool queries roadshow schedules and lists multiple filter criteria (e.g., research area, institution, security). This clear verb+resource definition makes the purpose obvious, though it does not differentiate from sibling tools like gangtise_announcement_list.

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 use for filtering roadshow schedules but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No explicit when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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