create_report_plan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly reveals two key behaviors: the tool creates a persistent side-effect task and runs asynchronously due to model/search service dependencies. This is meaningful, though it does not cover failure modes or how to track completion.

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 short sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose and the second adds the critical async caveat. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

The description covers the essential what and why-async, and an output schema exists so return values are not missing. However, without annotations and with no usage guidance or parameter semantics, the agent lacks workflow context such as how to check the persistent task later or when to use sibling tools.

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 0% and the tool description does not mention 'topic' or 'options' at all. The nested ReportOptions type has some schema-level explanation (non-sensitive config, extra=forbid), but the description adds no parameter meaning, leaving the agent to infer from names alone.

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 a specific action: '创建持久化任务并生成可编辑大纲' (create a persistent task and generate an editable outline). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like generate_report by focusing on the outline, not the final report.

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 context by explaining the tool is asynchronous because it calls model and search services, which implies when it should be used. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as preferring generate_report for final output or update_report_outline for editing an existing outline.

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