列出可用年度

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the tool's output but does not explicitly state that it is read-only or has no side effects. For a listing tool, this is adequate but could be improved by explicitly noting non-destructive 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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the main purpose and includes the key usage guidance. Every part is necessary and earns its place.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and serves as a prerequisite for sibling calculation tools, the description adequately explains its role and output. It could be slightly improved by noting data freshness or static nature, but it is complete enough for a simple listing 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 adds value by explaining the output contents (years, versions, wages) and their purpose, meeting the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

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 lists supported years, data versions, and basic wages, and distinguishes it from sibling calculation tools by noting it is used to confirm valid year values before calculations.

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 explicitly says 'before calculation, you can first use this tool to confirm valid year values', providing clear guidance on when to use it and implying it should not be used for the calculations themselves.

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