getPrinterPapers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. '查询' implies a read-only, non-destructive lookup, and the purpose is narrow enough that this may be sufficient. But it says nothing about return shape (paper names vs. objects), error behavior when the printer is unknown, or the fallback driver name resolution, so the behavioral picture is only partially complete.

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?

One compact sentence with the purpose first and the consumer fields after. There are no wasted words.

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?

No annotations and no output schema, so the description should say what the returned paper entries look like (strings, or objects with bin names) and what happens for an unknown printer. The failure mode is not covered, leaving a real gap for a tool whose output must be passed verbatim into other tools.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by naming the target fields the result feeds, tying the returned papers to concrete parameter values elsewhere; it does not cover driver_name, but the schema does so adequately.

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 an specific verb+resource: query the list of papers supported by a given printer. It is clearly distinct from its printers' siblings (getPrinterList returns printers, not papers) and the downstream fields it feeds are named. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings in the description text.

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 purpose clause '用于填 paper_format / print_options.paperFormat / print_options.bin' states clearly when an agent should call it: before setting a paper format on printHtml/printPdf/printFile. No explicit when-not-to-use or error handling is given, but the usage context is unmistakable.

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