run_cleaning_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only restates the operation. It does not disclose permissions/robot availability requirements, whether the task blocks for wait_seconds, whether it is destructive or interruptible, or what state changes occur — significant gaps for a task-launching action tool.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded, which is good. However, the bilingual duplication adds no informational value beyond one language, and the extreme brevity is a symptom of under-specification rather than efficiency.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter documentation, the description is far too thin. An agent cannot confidently invoke it without knowing the meaning of required fields like resource_ids or the behavior of wait_seconds.

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 8 parameters, and the description adds nothing about any of them. Terms like robot_sn, map_id, resource_ids, mode, strength, loop_count, and wait_seconds are entirely unexplained in both the schema and the description.

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 states a specific verb pair and resource ('create and start cleaning task'), so the action is identifiable. However, it gives no differentiation from closely related siblings like start_task or create_task_definition, leaving the agent to guess how this tool relates to them.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as start_task or create_task_definition. The agent receives no signal about which of the several task-launching siblings to choose.

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