create_collaborative_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool creates a task and lists parameters, but does not mention side effects (e.g., whether existing tasks are overwritten), required permissions, or failure behaviors. The return value is vague ('任务创建结果').

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 short and well-structured, listing parameters and return value in a clear format. Every sentence adds value. However, it could be slightly more concise by omitting the parameter list if the schema were documented.

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 the complexity of creating a multi-robot task with dependencies and assignments, the description lacks sufficient detail. It does not explain error handling, required fields (though schema shows dependencies as optional, description does not mention), or valid robot IDs. No output schema exists to clarify the return.

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%, so the description compensates partially by explaining the format for 'robot_assignments' and 'dependencies' parameters. However, it lacks detail on valid values for operations within robot_assignments, and 'task_name' is only described as '任务名称' with no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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's purpose as '创建多机器人协同任务' (Create multi-robot collaborative task), which is a specific verb+resource pair. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'execute_collaborative_task' and 'setup_multi_robot_coordination'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not explain that creation should precede execution, or what distinguishes it from 'setup_multi_robot_coordination'. The description only states what it does without context.

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