查询全国地区 / List China regions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which cover the safety profile. The description adds the deterministic property and the specific content returned, but does not disclose ordering, pagination, or effects of the optional province_code parameter.

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?

Two brief sentences with no filler. The description is front-loaded with the action verb and immediately states the resource and returned data, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

The high-level purpose is clear and an output schema exists to document return values. However, the lack of any explanation for the optional province_code parameter leaves a significant gap for correct invocation. For a tool with a single optional parameter, this omission is notable.

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 optional parameter 'province_code' has no description in the schema and is completely absent from the tool description. The agent has no information about its format, meaning, or how it filters the results, making it impossible to invoke the tool with meaningful arguments.

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 clear verb ('读取' / 'Returns') and names the exact resource: the province/prefecture two-level region directory and job counts. It also specifies the deterministic nature, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_sources or list_jobs.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or preferred contexts. It simply states what the tool does without supporting selection decisions.

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