yuque_create_doc

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden for a mutating tool. It discloses the HTTP endpoint and the parent-node placement default, but says nothing about auth requirements, failure modes, or side effects such as creating a TOC node.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the conditional parent-node rule. The mixed-language phrasing and file pointer add minor friction but no real bloat.

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?

An 8-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema should at least sketch returns, auth and error behavior; the description covers only parent placement and the endpoint, leaving the calling agent under-informed.

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 baseline is 3. The parent_uuid sentence merely restates the schema's own Chinese description, and the remaining 7 parameters get no extra meaning from the description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a document in a repo'), which cleanly separates it from siblings such as yuque_create_note, yuque_update_doc and yuque_import_file. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Nothing says when to choose this tool over yuque_create_note, yuque_import_url or yuque_copy_doc, nor what prerequisites (permissions on the repo) are needed. Only a pointer to an external API reference file is offered, which is not actionable selection guidance.

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