dingtalk_doc_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action (list), without mentioning read-only nature, permissions, pagination, or any side effects. For a list operation, this is minimal but not misleading, yet it lacks sufficient context for an agent to fully understand 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, focused sentence that conveys the essential purpose without extra words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not mention return format, recursion, sorting, or other behavior, and does not differentiate from similar list tools like dingtalk_drive_list. Given no output schema, additional detail about the response would improve completeness.

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 schema description already covers the parent_id parameter well (optional, empty for root). The tool description adds meaningful context by specifying that parent_id can refer to a folder or knowledge base, going beyond the schema's generic 'parent node ID'. This is valuable for correct parameter usage.

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's function: listing files and subfolders within a folder or knowledge base. It uses a specific verb (list) and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like drive list or wiki node list by explicitly covering both folders and knowledge bases.

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 implies usage (to list contents of a folder or knowledge base) but does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives like dingtalk_drive_list or dingtalk_wiki_node_list. There are no exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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