xlayer_list_subscriptions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only supplies a read hint ('L:READ') and a category, but does not describe side effects, return behavior, access requirements, or error conditions. The lack of detail leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's behavior beyond being read-only.

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 extremely concise, fitting into a single line. It front-loads the read and category tags, followed by the prerequisite. However, it could be more structured with a brief sentence clarifying the tool's action. The brevity is appropriate given the lack of parameters, but some prose would improve clarity.

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?

Given the tool's name suggests a listing operation, the absence of output schema and behavioral details makes the description incomplete. It does not explain what 'subscriptions' are, what the output format is, or how the prerequisite (agent_catalog) relates. The agent is left without enough context to effectively use the tool.

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 no parameters, so schema_description_coverage is 100%. The description contains no parameter-specific information, which is acceptable since there are none to describe. No additional value is needed beyond the schema.

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 lacks a clear statement of what the tool does. While the name 'xlayer_list_subscriptions' suggests listing subscriptions, the description only contains tags '[L:READ]' and 'CAT:[链上]' and a prerequisite directive. It does not explicitly say 'Lists subscriptions' or define the resource being operated on. Other tags like 'L:READ' hint at a read operation but are not definitive.

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 provides a prerequisite ('请先调用 agent_catalog'), but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like xlayer_subscribe or xlayer_get_events. There is no explicit context for choosing this tool over alternatives, nor any indication of when not to use it.

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