end_request

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, destruction, or safety. Only a brief note on one parameter, leaving the tool's behavior largely unspecified.

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 very short (two sentences), which is concise, but it sacrifices clarity. The structure is front-loaded, yet the meaning is ambiguous.

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 two parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the purpose, behavior, or the label parameter, leaving the agent with insufficient information for correct invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description only mentions wait_handler_return as 'reserved for upper-layer orchestration'. The label parameter is completely unexplained, so the description adds minimal value over the schema.

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 states '结束请求粒度 timeline' which suggests ending a request or timeline granularity. From sibling tools like begin_request, it can be inferred that this ends a request, but the purpose is vague and not explicitly stated.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like request_timeline or request_events. The description only mentions the wait_handler_return parameter is reserved for upper-layer orchestration, but does not provide usage context.

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