列出小说章节

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. '读取' implies a read-only operation and the listed return fields (title/word count/status) add useful context, but it omits pagination behavior, auth/session prerequisites despite login_tomato existing, and ordering. Decent but incomplete for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded sentence that identifies the resource, the scope, the returned data, and the purpose with no filler. Every clause 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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool, the description covers resource, scope, return fields, and purpose. Missing only pagination/auth details, which is acceptable given the tool's low complexity and absent output schema.

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 description coverage is 100% with a single required book_id already documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about parameter format or semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb+resource in a scoped way ('读取番茄后台某本书的章节列表') and enumerates the returned fields (标题/字数/状态). An agent can distinguish it from sibling mutation tools like add_chapter_tomato and batch_publish_chapters without opening either schema.

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 clause '用于复核发布结果与避免重号' gives implied usage context — post-publish verification and duplicate-number avoidance — but names no alternatives (e.g. get_publish_status) and states no when-not conditions. Usage is implied rather than prescribed.

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