choerodon_list_attachments

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

No annotations exist to provide hints like read-only or destructive behavior. The description only states what the tool returns (filenames+URLs) but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, error scenarios, or whether the list is paginated or subject to permissions.

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 a single sentence that efficiently states the tool's purpose. No wasted words, front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description is terse for a tool with 2 parameters and no annotation coverage. It does not mention pagination, sorting, error handling, or scope of attachments (e.g., all files or just those with URLs). Adequate for a simple list but lacking completeness.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the properties in the input schema have no descriptions. The tool description adds no explanation of parameters; it does not specify that issue_id is required, nor does it clarify the role of project_id (optional, default empty string). The agent must guess parameter meanings from names alone.

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?

Description clearly states it lists attachments for a task, including filenames and URLs. It uses specific verb+resource and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'choerodon_download_attachment' (downloads a single attachment) and 'choerodon_list_issue' (lists issues).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., download vs list). No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The description leaves the agent to infer usage from sibling tool names.

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