시리즈 목록

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the tool returns post counts per series, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. It does not describe pagination or ordering, but these are not critical for a simple list tool.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value: the first states what it does, the second explains how to use the returned id. No filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter list tool with good annotations and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool returns (series list with post counts) and how the returned id is used in another tool. It is complete for the agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 describes the only parameter (username) with '@ 없이', providing 100% coverage. The description does not add anything about the parameter beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it lists a user's series and includes the number of posts in each series. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like velog_list_posts, and there is no other series-listing tool among the siblings.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool: to get the series id needed for assigning a draft to a series, referencing velog_create_draft's series_id parameter. It provides a clear workflow but does not mention exclusions or alternatives, though no direct alternative exists for listing series.

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