pls_create_map

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so description must disclose write behavior. It does so by requiring a confirmation parameter ('confirm'='确认') and specifying the return format (success flag, entity name, action type). This adds value beyond annotations.

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 front-loaded with the purpose. The inclusion of an emoji and formatting is acceptable. The ambiguous phrase '根据实体类型传入对应字段' slightly detracts from clarity, but overall it is concise.

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?

The description lacks completeness for a create tool with 5 parameters. It does not explain whether the optional 'id' parameter is used for creation (it is likely auto-generated). The output schema is missing, but the return format is described. The vague entity type comment leaves gaps.

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%, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds no new semantic information beyond repeating the confirmation requirement. The vague statement about entity types does not improve understanding.

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 states '创建地图实体' (create map entity), which clearly identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling CRUD tools for other entities. However, the phrase '根据实体类型传入对应字段' is vague and somewhat confuses the purpose.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pls_update_map or pls_delete_map. It only mentions a tip about required fields, but no contextual usage advice.

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