DataWorks MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'create' which implies a write/mutation operation, but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether the creation is idempotent, error handling, or what happens on success/failure. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence in Chinese ('创建数据开发文件资源') with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's purpose, earning full marks 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 this is a mutation tool (create operation) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects, error handling, and what the tool returns, which are critical for an AI agent to use it correctly in a data development context.

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%, with clear descriptions for ProjectId, Spec, and ResourceFile. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining relationships between parameters or usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 '创建数据开发文件资源' (Create data development file resource) states the verb 'create' and the resource type 'data development file resource', which gives a basic purpose. However, it doesn't specify what this resource is used for or how it differs from other 'Create' tools in the sibling list (e.g., CreateDataSource, CreateFunction, CreateNode), making it vague about its specific role.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, and with many sibling tools like CreateDataSource or CreateFunction, it fails to differentiate usage scenarios, leaving the agent without clear direction.

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