queryProjUser

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: reads form configuration, builds query, uses data dictionary translations, returns context with IDs. It does not explicitly state read-only nature or potential side effects, but 'query' implies safe. Missing details on rate limits or permissions, but covers core behavior.

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?

Description is three sentences in Chinese, efficiently stating the purpose, process, and return context. No redundant phrases, front-loaded key action 'dynamically paginate query user list'. Every sentence adds value.

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 complexity (dynamic filtering, configuration-based, data dictionary translation) and no output schema, the description adequately explains the process and return context (includes id). Lacks details on error handling or permission requirements, but sufficient for an agent to understand usage.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context on overall flow (reading config, building query) but does not add new per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter. The filters parameter is elaborated in the schema description, matching description text.

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?

Description clearly states it queries user list with dynamic pagination and configuration-based filtering. It specifies the verb 'query', resource 'user list', and distinct behavior like using MES form configuration. This differentiates it from sibling tools that operate on projects or tasks.

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?

Description implies use for user queries but does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like queryProjCustomer or queryProjProjectList. It lacks 'when to use' and 'when not to use' guidance. However, the context of sibling tools and the specific 'user list' resource provides implicit differentiation.

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