list_coupons

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint: true, and the description adds no additional behavioral context such as pagination, filtering, or output specifics. It essentially restates the tool name without disclosing any traits beyond what annotations already convey.

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 short phrase with no redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a parameterless listing tool, and every word earns its place.

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 the tool's simplicity (0 params, read-only, output schema exists), the description is largely sufficient. The output schema covers return structure, and the description clearly states the resource. Minor gap: no elaboration on what constitutes an 'internet code' versus a 'coupon', but 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 tool accepts zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (no params). Per rubric, baseline is 4 since there are no parameter details to explain.

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 '列出上网码/优惠券' clearly states the tool lists internet codes/coupons, using a specific verb ('列出' = list) and a precise resource. It is distinguishable from all sibling tools, none of which mention coupons or internet codes.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus other list_* tools, nor does it mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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