get_command_blacklist

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey the tool's behavior. It indicates a read-only operation via 'Get' and 'Returns lists,' but adds no further context about permissions, sorting, format, or potential side effects. For a simple getter, this is adequate but minimal.

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 concise, consisting of two short sentences (in English and Chinese) that directly state the action and the return value. It is front-loaded with the key verb 'Get' and resource, and every word serves a purpose without redundancy.

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 simple nature (no parameters, read-only, with an output schema), the description is sufficiently complete. It conveys what the tool returns and the scope (current blacklist). With an output schema available, there is no need for the description to detail return fields.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter meanings since there are none. The schema already confirms no parameters, and the description adds no additional parameter-related information beyond the tool's purpose.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get the current command and directory blacklist.' It specifies the resource (command and directory blacklist) and the action (get), and the return content (lists of blocked commands and directories). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_command_blacklist.

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 implies the tool is for reading the current blacklist, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. Given the presence of update_command_blacklist, the intended use is implied but not articulated. No explicit guidance is offered.

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