queryWorkstationList

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses reading a form config, using a specific endpoint, and always adding accountType=1. It is read-only but does not mention auth needs, rate limits, or side effects.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence adds value. No redundant or vague information.

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 description mentions that the returned context includes id for each workstation, which is useful for selection. However, no output schema is provided, and the description lacks details on pagination metadata or other fields returned. Adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by explaining that filters key must be AndonSysUser form fields, and that text fields use fuzzy match while time fields use range. This goes beyond schema descriptions.

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 clearly states '查询工位机列表' (query workstation list) and provides specific details about the underlying endpoint, fixed parameter, and returned context. It distinguishes from siblings like auditProductionTask or dispatchToStation, which are clearly different tools.

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 usage for listing workstations and mentions returning context for selection, but does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives. However, sibling tools are all distinct, so no confusion.

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