pls_create_alarm_rule

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

The description adds the confirmation requirement ('confirm: 二次确认（必填）') beyond annotations, but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or rate limits. Annotations indicate a non-read, non-destructive write operation, which aligns.

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 three well-structured sentences plus a hint line, with no extraneous content. It front-loads the purpose and parameter notes, but the emoji and formatting could be streamlined.

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?

While the return structure is described, the description lacks information on error scenarios, idempotency (annotations say false), and the exact fields required beyond confirm. For a 6-parameter create tool, more context would help.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds vague guidance ('根据实体类型传入对应字段') and repeats confirm details, without clarifying which fields are actually needed for creation.

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 title and first sentence '【🔧 管理】创建告警规则实体' clearly state the verb (创建) and resource (告警规则实体), distinguishing it from sibling tools like pls_update_alarm_rule and pls_delete_alarm_rule.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It hints at '只传必填字段' but does not mention prerequisites, nor does it differentiate from update/delete operations.

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