zhiqi_collab_abort

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 disclosing behavior. It merely says 'abort collaboration' without stating side effects, irreversibility, permission requirements, or what happens to the underlying task. There is zero behavioral disclosure beyond the verb itself.

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 extremely brief (four characters) and does not earn its place because it omits essential information. This is under-specification rather than conciseness, similar to the 'process' example where brevity masks inadequacy.

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 2 required parameters, no schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is completely inadequate for an agent to correctly call this tool. It does not specify what taskNo refers to, why a reason is needed, or what the response looks like.

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?

The schema has 2 required parameters (taskNo, reason) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain what these parameters mean, how they are used, or any constraints (e.g., format, allowed values). The description adds no value beyond the raw schema.

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 action (中止, abort) and a generic resource (协作, collaboration), which distinguishes it from sibling collaboration tools that accept, respond, or release. However, it does not clarify what 'abort' concretely does (e.g., cancel a task, stop processing), and the resource is broad without referencing the taskNo parameter that is part of the schema.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or scenarios where aborting is appropriate, nor does it exclude cases where other tools like zhiqi_collab_release or zhiqi_collab_respond would be more suitable.

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