Получить список ВН

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states a simple read operation, omitting details about authentication requirements, pagination via limit, error handling, or return format. This minimal description provides little beyond the basic function.

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 clear sentence with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 low complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description provides the core purpose but omits behavioral details like pagination or output structure. It is minimally sufficient for a simple list retrieval, but lacks the context that would fully prepare an agent for response handling and usage limits.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema, so the description adds nothing new about parameter meanings. Schema coverage is 100%, which meets the baseline for a score of 3.

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 retrieves a list of the user's visual novels filtered by status. The verb 'get' and resource 'list of visual novels' distinguish it from sibling tools like add, remove, update, and search.

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 implies the tool is for fetching the user's VN list with a status filter, but it does not explicitly differentiate from search_vn or provide exclusions. No alternative tools are mentioned, so usage context is only implied, not explicitly guided.

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