apisix_list_services

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

The description discloses no behavioral traits beyond what annotations already provide. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description only repeats that it is a query operation, adding no context about pagination behavior, default page size, or response format. Since the description contributes nothing beyond annotations, transparency is low.

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 short sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for the minimal information it conveys, though it could be more informative. There is no wasted content, structure, or redundancy.

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 tool has 4 parameters, pagination, field selection, and no output schema, the one-sentence description is insufficient. It does not explain what the response contains, how pagination works, or how to use the detail/fields parameters effectively. The schema helps but the description should provide at least a minimal overview of behavior.

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% coverage with descriptive parameter fields (page, detail, fields, page_size), each with clear Chinese descriptions. The tool description does not add any parameter-level meaning, but the schema fully carries that burden. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 '查询服务列表' clearly states the action (query) and resource (service list), which aligns with the tool name. However, it does not add any scope or differentiation from sibling list tools like apisix_list_routes or apisix_list_upstreams, so it stops short of a 5.

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 use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, filters, or scenarios where apisix_get_service would be more appropriate. The description is a bare statement of what it does, not when to use it.

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