create_doc

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses the dual behavior (drive creation + wiki attachment), but lacks details on return values, error conditions, authorization requirements, or side effects.

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 two sentences, concise and front-loaded with the authoritative 'Official API' marker. Every sentence provides essential information without 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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main workflow and parameter usage but omits details about the return value (e.g., doc token) and prerequisites. It is adequate but leaves gaps in the overall picture.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying the relationship between folder_id and wiki_space_id (folder_id ignored when wiki_space_id is set) and explaining wiki_parent_node_token for nested placement. Schema coverage is 100%, but the description enriches the context.

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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'Feishu document', and distinguishes from siblings by explaining the optional wiki placement. It specifies that the doc is created in drive and attached as a Wiki node, differentiating from tools like create_wiki_node.

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 explains when to use wiki parameters for placement in a Wiki space, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools for other doc-related operations.

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