list_countries

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool lists countries and supports sorting by gdp, prestige, population, or tag. However, it does not mention read-only intent, limit handling, or any other behavioral nuance beyond listing and sorting.

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 extremely concise: one sentence plus a compact list of sort options. Every component carries useful information, and the core purpose is front-loaded. No filler or redundant wording exists.

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, optional-parameter list tool with an output schema and no required parameters, the description is largely sufficient. It documents the key sort options and the resource scope. Minor gaps include no explicit limit semantics and no usage alternatives, but these are partially covered by the schema defaults and the tool's simplicity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to the 'sort' parameter by enumerating valid values (gdp, prestige, population, tag), which the schema itself does not provide via enums. However, the 'limit' parameter is not described at all, leaving a gap.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: '列出存档里的国家' ('list countries in the save'), and explicitly names the available sort keys. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'country' or 'compare_countries' by identifying its action as listing countries across the save.

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 such as 'country', 'compare_countries', or 'rankings'. It does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or when another sibling would be more appropriate.

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