feishu_create_doc

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While it mentions the tool creates documents and supports asynchronous queries, it doesn't describe important behavioral aspects: whether this requires specific permissions, what happens on failure, whether documents are immediately available, rate limits, or what the response contains. The asynchronous functionality is mentioned but not explained in detail.

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 concise - just one sentence in Chinese. It's front-loaded with the main purpose and includes the asynchronous functionality. However, it could be more structured by separating the creation functionality from the query functionality for clarity.

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?

For a document creation tool with 6 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the tool's behavior, error conditions, response format, or how the asynchronous functionality works. The mention of task_id query suggests dual functionality (create AND query), but this isn't adequately explained given the complexity.

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 the schema already documents all 6 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema - it mentions Markdown content and asynchronous task_id queries, but doesn't provide additional context about parameter interactions, constraints, or usage patterns that aren't already in the schema descriptions.

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: '从 Markdown 创建云文档' (create cloud document from Markdown). It specifies the verb ('创建' - create) and resource ('云文档' - cloud document), and mentions support for asynchronous task_id queries. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'feishu_update_doc' or 'feishu_fetch_doc', which prevents a perfect score.

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 minimal usage guidance. It mentions asynchronous task_id query support, but doesn't explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'feishu_update_doc' or 'feishu_fetch_doc'. No context about prerequisites, when to choose this over other document creation methods, or any exclusions are provided.

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