list_url_keywords

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already discloses that this is a safe read operation, so the description does not need to restate that. The description adds minimal context with 'tab: 关键字替换', but it does not describe other behavioral traits such as whether all items are returned, pagination, or the structure of the results. It is consistent with the annotation and adds a little context, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 very brief and front-loaded with the verb. The parenthetical '(tab: 关键字替换)' adds a small UI context but is somewhat cryptic. It is concise overall, but the parenthetical could be considered less essential. Still, it earns its place as a navigational hint.

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 simplicity of the tool (0 params, read-only, output schema exists), a short description might suffice. However, the description does not explain what 'URL keyword replacement' means, nor does it provide any domain context or alternative usage. Since there is an output schema, return values are covered, but the overall context is minimal and the description is in Chinese, which might reduce clarity for non-Chinese agents.

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 has zero parameters, so the input schema is complete and there is nothing for the description to explain about parameters. The baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not need to add anything here.

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 URL 关键字替换' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (URL keyword replacement). It is specific enough to know it lists URL keyword replacement rules. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar sibling tools like list_url_params_replace, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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. It does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions. This is a simple list command, but usage guidance is completely absent.

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