Dpanel Store List

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it states nothing about read-only semantics, pagination, result size, or what 'list' returns. A one-line restatement leaves the agent to guess whether this is a safe read and how results are bounded.

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?

It is a single short sentence with zero waste, but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than crispness. There is nothing to front-load because nothing of substance is said.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the tool is parameterless, keeping complexity low. However, for a list tool in a large store/cron/container family, the description gives no scope, ordering, or filtering context, leaving a minor but real gap.

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, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; baseline 4 applies. No parameter-related information is missing that the description could have supplied.

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 '应用商店应用列表。' merely restates the tool name and title (dpanel_store_list / Dpanel Store List) in Chinese, doing nothing to distinguish it from siblings like dpanel_store_sync, dpanel_store_deploy, dpanel_store_create, or dpanel_store_delete. It identifies the resource but conveys no verb or scope beyond the name itself.

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 use this tool versus the other store-related siblings (sync/deploy/create/delete) or when not to. The agent must infer usage from the name alone; no alternatives or preconditions are named.

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