create_simple_schedule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it says nothing. For a mutation tool that creates schedules it does not state permissions required, side effects, whether the schedule starts immediately, or what happens on conflicting schedules.

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 text is short but not concise in a useful sense — it is under-specified rather than economical. A single restated phrase cannot front-load anything meaningful for a 17-parameter tool.

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 17 parameters, nested objects, zero schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the definition is completely inadequate. An agent would have no basis for constructing a correct call.

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% across 17 parameters (9 required), including opaque nested objects like work_mode, map_resource_list, and task_advance_config, plus integer enums such as site_mode, work_mode, plan_repeat_type, and plan_execute_type. The description adds no parameter meaning at all, leaving critical fields entirely undocumented.

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 '创建简易排班 / Create simple schedule' is essentially a bilingual restatement of the tool name create_simple_schedule, giving no information beyond the identifier. It does not distinguish this tool from the sibling create_schedule or explain what 'simple' versus regular scheduling means.

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 guidance whatsoever on when to use this tool versus create_schedule, create_task_definition, or the update/delete schedule siblings. The agent is left to infer everything from the name alone.

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