Dpanel Image Build List

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and delivers almost none. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether results are paginated or ordered, how many entries are returned, or what fields each entry contains. Only the single fact that a list exists is conveyed.

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?

One short sentence with zero filler, so it is concise and front-loaded. But at this length it is under-specified rather than efficient – the brevity reflects absent information rather than tight editing.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters, output schema present), so the description need not explain return values. Still, for a list endpoint an agent would benefit from knowing about ordering or whether it needs any prerequisite state, none of which is mentioned. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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, and the rule sets a baseline of 4 for parameterless tools. There is nothing for the description to clarify, and the schema is complete (100% coverage).

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 phrase '镜像构建任务列表' (image build task list) names the resource clearly enough that an agent can tell it returns build tasks. However it is a bare noun phrase with no verb or scope, and it does nothing to distinguish itself from siblings like dpanel_image_build_detail, dpanel_image_build_create, or dpanel_image_build_run. Purpose is inferable but minimally stated.

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 guidance on when to call this versus dpanel_image_build_detail or the other build-task tools. No prerequisites, no mention of filters or when the list would be empty. The agent must infer purely from the name that this is the enumeration entry point.

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