batch_create_questions

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

No annotations provided. Description only mentions instability but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, side effects, or return format. For a mutation tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 with a parenthetical that adds value. No unnecessary words, though it could be slightly better structured by separating the note about instability from the list of types.

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's complexity (4 parameters, nested objects, 7 question types) and no output schema, the description is too brief. It lacks information about return values, error handling, how to deal with instability, and prerequisites (e.g., need a paper_id from query_group_tasks). Incomplete for safe 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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds a list of supported question types, which helps interpret the 'questions' parameter. However, it does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema's discriminators and $defs already provide.

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 tool's purpose: batch creation of questions. It lists the supported question types (单选、多选等), distinguishing it from individual creation tools like create_single_choice_question. The note '非官方接口' adds context.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. While it mentions instability and powerfulness, it does not compare with sibling tools like office_create_questions or the individual creation tools, leaving the agent without usage context.

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