List Domain Blacklist

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds only the tab label, contributing no extra behavioral context such as what the entries represent (domain patterns vs. URLs) or how the list relates to the url blacklist. With annotations covering safety, this small addition lands below the ~3 baseline.

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 single line is front-loaded with no filler, which is good, but it is under-specified rather than deliberately minimal — the parenthetical label consumes the whole second half without adding meaning. Brevity here reflects a thin definition, not efficient communication.

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?

With an output schema present and readOnlyHint annotations, the description does not need to explain return values, and a zero-param list tool is simple. What is still missing is the scope of '禁止娱乐网站' relative to the sibling url/domain blacklist tools, which is the one thing an agent needs to pick correctly.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a param-less tool is 4. No param semantics are missing.

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?

States a verb ('列出'/list) and a resource ('禁止娱乐网站', blocked entertainment sites), so the basic action is identifiable. However it never distinguishes itself from the very similar sibling tools list_url_blacklist, add_domain_blacklist, or delete_domain_blacklist, and the parenthetical '(tab: 禁止娱乐网站)' reads as a UI label rather than a scope definition.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no statement that this is the unfiltered 'list all' variant, and no pointer to the add/delete counterparts that operate on the same blacklist. The agent is left to infer the relationship to siblings from the tool name alone.

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