dingtalk_wiki_node_list

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool lists the node tree; it does not mention whether the list is recursive, how pagination works, required permissions, or what the response structure looks like.

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 concise sentence that communicates the core purpose. However, its brevity comes at the cost of missing essential usage and output details, so it is efficient but not fully sufficient.

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?

With no output schema, the description should at least indicate what the returned node tree contains (e.g., node IDs, names, types, hierarchy). It does not, and it also fails to explain the behavior when parent_node_id is provided. Given the tool's moderate complexity, the description is not sufficiently complete.

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?

Both parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any information about the parameters; in particular, the optional parent_node_id parameter's effect on the returned tree is not explained.

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 specifies the action ('列出' - list) and the resource ('知识库空间中的节点树' - node tree in knowledge base space), with a clarifying parenthetical about documents and folders. This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like wiki_space_list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wiki_space_search or doc_search. It does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or recommended use cases.

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