add_feature

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

The description states '生成' (generate/create), which implies a write operation creating new documents, but annotations declare readOnlyHint=true. This is a direct contradiction, undermining the agent's ability to predict side effects. Per the scoring rules, any contradiction must result in a score of 1.

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 two short sentences that are front-loaded with the purpose and usage. It avoids unnecessary detail and every phrase contributes to understanding, despite slight redundancy in repeating '生成...文档'.

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?

With no output schema and 6 optional parameters, the description should explain more about the tool's behavior and outputs. It does not describe the generated document structure, layout options, or template profiles, and the annotation contradiction further reduces trust in the available context.

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 provides 100% description coverage for all 6 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already supplies, so no reason to exceed the baseline.

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 tool generates new feature specification documents (requirements/design/task list) based on project context, using explicit verbs ('生成') and resource ('新功能规格文档'). It distinguishes itself from generic operations by specifying the exact output content, making its purpose unmistakable.

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?

The description provides a clear when-to-use trigger ('当用户需要添加新功能、生成功能规格文档时使用'), but it does not mention alternatives or exclusions. While this is sufficient for basic usage, the lack of explicit differentiation from sibling tools like start_feature prevents a top score.

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