create_live_pull_stream_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While '创建' (create) implies a write operation, the description doesn't specify required permissions, whether the task starts immediately, error handling, rate limits, or what happens if parameters are invalid. For a complex 26-parameter mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 front-loaded with the purpose statement, but then includes a verbose Args/Returns section that duplicates schema information. While this structure might help human readers, it adds redundancy for an AI agent that already has access to the schema. The core description is concise, but the overall text could be more 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?

For a complex mutation tool with 26 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns beyond 'TaskId' and '请求ID' (request ID), doesn't describe error conditions, doesn't provide usage examples, and doesn't clarify the operational context. The agent lacks crucial information to use this tool effectively.

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 the schema already documents all 26 parameters thoroughly with descriptions, defaults, and examples. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, but since schema coverage is high, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('创建直播拉流任务' translates to 'Create live pull stream task') and identifies the resource (a streaming task). It distinguishes from siblings like 'delete_live_pull_stream_task' by specifying creation, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other creation tools like 'create_live_transcode_rule' or 'create_live_transcode_template' in terms of when to use each.

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. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, constraints, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate compared to other streaming-related tools in the sibling list. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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