list_community_tools

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

There are no annotations, so the description must disclose behavior, but it says nothing about side effects, read-only status, output shape, or failure modes. The phrase '工具对照' only names a topic, not the tool's behavior.

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 short but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. A single ambiguous noun phrase does not earn its place as a useful definition.

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?

Even though there are no parameters, the description leaves the tool's purpose, return value, and relation to sibling tools undefined. An agent cannot tell what invoking this tool will do or when it should be used.

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 schema already covers this completely with an empty properties object, so there is no semantic gap for the description to fill.

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 is a noun phrase '官方/社区工具对照' (official/community tool comparison) rather than an action statement. It vaguely suggests listing or comparing tools but does not specify what the tool returns or how it differs from siblings like list_nodes or list_skills.

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?

No when-to-use guidance is provided. The tag 【次要】 hints at secondary status but does not explain when an agent should call this tool instead of list_nodes, list_skills, or lookup_official_doc, leaving selection to inference.

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