벨로그 시리즈 목록

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the tool is safe and non-destructive. The description adds value by clarifying the output (UUIDs) and their practical use (series_id in publishing). It does not contradict annotations and provides meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 consists of two short, direct sentences. Every sentence adds value: the first states what the tool does, the second explains its use case. There is no redundancy or unnecessary information.

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 has an output schema (not shown) which presumably describes the return structure, so the description does not need to detail output format. However, it could be more complete by clarifying behavior when username is omitted (e.g., defaults to authenticated user) or if authentication is required. The optional parameter and read-only annotation suggest public access, but this is not confirmed.

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 has 100% coverage for the single optional parameter 'username', which is fully described as '벨로그 계정명(@ 제외)' (account name without @). The description does not add additional parameter-level details, but the schema already provides sufficient information. Baseline 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 that it retrieves a list of series and their UUIDs, and explains that the UUID is used as series_id when publishing. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like velog_create_series (creates series) or velog_publish_post (publishes posts). The verb '가져옵니다' (gets) and the resource '시리즈 목록' (series list) are specific.

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 says when to use this tool: to get series UUIDs for use as series_id when publishing. It implies it should be used before publishing or updating posts that belong to a series. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like velog_create_series, though the context makes it clear.

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