Create Sine Waveform

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the important side effect that the curve is saved locally. It says nothing about permissions, overwrite/name-collision behavior, or failure modes, and it does not explain the interval-versus-continuous interaction beyond one clause.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, with no filler. The second sentence earns its place by disambiguating two of the ambiguous parameters, though the overall text is too sparse to be maximally efficient.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, but for a 7-param, 5-required mutation tool with zero annotation and zero schema coverage, the description leaves too much unspecified. It needs at least parameter meanings and the required range relationship between minimum_level and maximum_level.

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 7 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It hints at interval_seconds (interval-triggered suction) and vibration_level (optional continuous vibration), but leaves name, duration_seconds, period_seconds, minimum_level, and maximum_level completely undefined in both schema and prose.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('创建并本地保存正弦强度曲线') and notes the local persistence step, which separates it from a pure in-memory generator. It never distinguishes itself from close siblings like create_intent_waveform or save_waveform, so an agent cannot tell which creator to pick from the text alone.

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 statement of when to use this creator versus create_intent_waveform, save_waveform, or start_waveform. The second sentence clarifies waveform semantics (interval-triggered suction plus optional continuous vibration), which only indirectly implies the use case.

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