Lists recorded IELTS reading or listening question sets so you can retrieve a set_id and resubmit only answers when redoing a passage.
列出已录过的题集（同一本书同一篇只录一次），重做时把 set_id 传给 ingest_passage，只填这次的答案。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| module | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description still discloses useful behavior: deduplication by book/passage, the role of set_id in redoing a set, and the instruction to submit only current answers. It does not cover read-only safety, permissions, return format, or filtering behavior, leaving meaningful gaps for a tool with no annotation support.
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 compact sentence with the main purpose front-loaded and no obvious filler. It is slightly dense because it mixes listing scope with downstream ingest_passage workflow, but it remains efficient.
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?
For a low-complexity listing tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core purpose and redo flow adequately. It omits any explanation of the module parameter and does not describe the shape of the returned list beyond implying that set_id is available.
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 schema has 0% description coverage and defines a single optional module enum, but the description never mentions module or explains whether it filters the listed sets. The enum values reading/listening are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.
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 states a specific verb and resource: listing already-recorded question sets, with the uniqueness rule that the same book and passage are recorded only once. It also relates the output to ingest_passage for redoing a set, which helps distinguish the workflow, though it does not explicitly contrast list_sets with any sibling listing tool.
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?
It gives a clear redo workflow: pass set_id to ingest_passage and fill in only this attempt's answers. However, it does not explicitly say when to use list_sets versus alternatives, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites for calling it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.