List Url Params Replace

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description carries a lighter burden, but it adds nothing behavioral beyond that – no note on pagination, scope, or whether results are the configured replacement rules vs. live traffic. It essentially restates the read intent implied by 'list'.

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?

A single short clause with no wasted words, and the UI tab reference ('tab: 参数替换') is front-loaded as a small locator aid. It is efficient, though bordering on under-specified rather than lean.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and with zero parameters the schema side is trivial. However, for a listing tool the description omits any sense of what the listed replacement rules control or when to reach for it, leaving it minimally adequate.

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 per the baseline the schema carries no ambiguity the description needs to resolve. Nothing more is required 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 names a specific verb (列出/list) and resource (URL 参数替换 / URL parameter replacement), which separates it from the many other list_* siblings such as list_url_redirects or list_url_keywords. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling to disambiguate against, but the resource is concrete enough for selection.

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 preconditions, and no mention of alternatives among the numerous URL/domain list tools. The agent is left to infer everything about context from the name alone.

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