create_single_choice_question

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

The description discloses no behavioral traits beyond the action. Without annotations, it fails to mention side effects (e.g., linking to a paper), authentication needs, rate limits, or any other 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 excessively brief (5 characters) and lacks substantive content. It is not appropriately sized for the complexity of the tool; it sacrifices informative value for conciseness.

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 absence of annotations, no output schema, and the complexity of the input (nested ChoiceQuestion object with many fields), the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain how to construct the question object, what the tool returns, or how it interacts with the paper.

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 no parameter-level information beyond what the schema provides. With schema description coverage at 75%, the baseline is 3, and since the description does not supplement the schema, it maintains this baseline.

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 '创建单选题' clearly indicates the tool creates a single-choice question. While it is very brief, it is specific about the verb and resource, and the naming distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_multiple_choice_question.

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, such as create_multiple_choice_question or create_true_false_question. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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