create_parallel_group

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

No annotations provided. The description states the core behavior (simultaneous execution) but lacks details on side effects, reversibility, permissions, or response. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and purpose. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, usage context, and parameter constraints are in schema. However, it omits reversibility and response behavior.

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 100% and the description adds no significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 applies.

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 the verb 'mark' and resource 'parallel group', and explains that tasks can execute simultaneously. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_dependency by focusing on parallel execution.

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?

Explicitly states '适用于无依赖关系的同层任务' (suitable for tasks at the same level with no dependencies), providing clear context. Does not name alternatives but the sibling list implies add_dependency is the alternative for dependencies.

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