fgui_list_transitions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It transparently implies a read-only operation and scopes the behavior to the current component, but it does not state prerequisites (e.g., open component) or edge-case behavior. The output schema mitigates return-shape ambiguity, and a list/read operation is low-risk.

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?

A single, compact sentence with no filler. Every phrase earns its place: '全部' clarifies scope, '当前组件' identifies context, and '类型化关键帧' states what is included.

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 parameterless list operation with an output schema, this description is complete. The agent knows the operation is read-only, which component it applies to, and what is returned, with no missing parameters or prerequisites.

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 and the schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The only contextual requirement, '当前组件', is implicit execution context rather than a parameter, so the baseline for zero-parameter tools applies.

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 '读取' (read/list), a clear target ('当前组件的全部 Transition'), and additional scope ('类型化关键帧'). The plural listing scope distinguishes it from the singular sibling fgui_get_transition, and it is clearly not a create/update/remove operation.

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 phrase '当前组件' provides clear context: the operation applies to the active/current component. However, it does not explicitly contrast this with fgui_get_transition or other transition-related siblings, so when to choose this tool over alternatives is left to inference.

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