列出 Eolink 接口分组

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds return structure details (group_id, group_name, parent_group_id, group_child_list) and hierarchical nature, which annotations don't cover.

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?

Concise and well-structured: purpose statement, parameter description, return structure, and typical usage pattern. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter, read-only, and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, parameter, return format, and usage workflow.

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?

Only one parameter project_id with 100% schema coverage. Description adds context on how to obtain it via eolink_list_projects, which is not in the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists all interface groups (including sub-groups) under a project for understanding organizational structure. It distinguishes itself from siblings like eolink_search_apis by specifying its use case.

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?

Provides clear context: used after getting project_id via eolink_list_projects, and typical usage to feed group_id into eolink_search_apis. No explicit when-not-to-use, but the read-only nature makes it broadly applicable.

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