whistle_value_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It does disclose that the tool returns a list of all Values and defines them as key-value pairs, which is useful. However, it does not mention any caveats such as return format, ordering, or performance implications, leaving some behavioral details unclear.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key action ('get') and resource ('all Values list'). No wasted words; it earns its place entirely.

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 zero-parameter listing tool, the description adequately conveys the purpose and the nature of the returned data (key-value pairs). While there is no output schema, the description's mention of 'list' gives the basic shape. It could be slightly more specific about the return structure, but overall it is sufficient for this simple tool.

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 input schema is empty (0 parameters), so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description adds context by specifying the scope ('all Values') and that they are key-value pairs, which helps clarify what the tool operates on without needing parameter details.

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 clearly states the tool fetches all Values (key-value pairs) in whistle. It uses a specific verb (获取/get) and resource (all Values), distinguishing it from sibling tools like whistle_value_get, whistle_value_set, and whistle_value_remove.

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 offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose implies it is for listing all values, there is no mention of when to choose whistle_value_get for a specific value or whistle_value_set for modifications, leaving usage context implicit.

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