get_certificate_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention that this is a read-only operation, whether pagination exists, or any other side effects. The description '获取证书列表' simply states the action without behavioral context.

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 extremely concise (one short sentence) and front-loaded with the core action. However, it may be too brief to be fully effective, but the conciseness is not detrimental to clarity.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, pagination behavior, or whether the list is scoped globally or per user/workspace. This is insufficient for a list endpoint in a domain with many related 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters ('按证书名称筛选' and '按证书 ID 筛选'), so the schema already explains them. The description adds no additional meaning or usage hints beyond what the schema provides, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 '获取证书列表' (Get certificate list) clearly states the verb and resource, making the tool's purpose evident. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'upload_certificate' or 'update_certificate' beyond the action type.

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. No context about scenarios or prerequisites is given, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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