dingtalk_aitable_base_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It communicates that the operation is read-only and scoped to the current user's accessible bases, but it does not disclose pagination, ordering, error behavior, or result format beyond the word 'list'.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the operation and scope effectively for a zero-parameter tool.

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 zero-parameter listing tool, the description is nearly sufficient, naming the action and access scope. However, without an output schema, it does not explicitly describe the returned base objects' key fields or pagination, leaving minor ambiguity.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter semantics to document, and the description appropriately implies no inputs are required.

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 uses a specific verb ('列出'/'list') and identifies the resource ('当前用户可访问的 AI 表格（Base）'), clearly distinguishing this list operation from siblings like dingtalk_aitable_base_search and dingtalk_aitable_base_create.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to choose this tool over alternatives; sibling dingtalk_aitable_base_search exists but is never referenced. There are no explicit use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and description alone.

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