MK 课程列表

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. '列出' implies a read-only operation and the returned fields are named, but it does not state whether the list is truncated, how 'recent' is defined or ordered, or whether authentication via mk_login is required — gaps that matter for a discovery tool consuming an account-scoped list.

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?

Two compact sentences with zero waste: the first defines the resource and its fields, the second immediately explains how its output feeds the rest of the toolset. Front-loaded and appropriately sized for a no-argument listing tool.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates by enumerating the key returned fields and explaining downstream tid consumption. Minor gaps remain around truncation/pagination and how 'recent' is bounded, but nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter detail (none exists to add), but it does clarify that the tid values needed by other tools are sourced from this call's output, which is useful semantic context around usage rather than input.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('列出当前账号最近学习的课程') plus the exact fields returned (termId/教师/学校/起止时间/发布状态), which distinguishes it from mk_get_course, the single-course lookup sibling. An agent can tell this is the discovery/enumeration step.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to call it — to obtain the tid that other tools require — and provides a fallback source (the tid in a course page URL) when the target course is absent from the list. It lacks a clear 'when not to use' statement or comparison against other listing siblings, but the workflow guidance is concrete.

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