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

没有annotations，描述必须承担行为披露的全部责任。它仅提及需要Bearer认证，但未说明删除是否永久、是否影响关联资源、是否幂等或错误响应行为。对于一个破坏性操作，这是显著的透明度缺口。

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?

描述非常简短，没有冗余句子，核心删除意图放在最前。但'Fleet/Platform'作为一个独立片段含义模糊，信息价值有限，稍有浪费。

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?

虽然工具参数简单，但无输出schema、无annotations，描述需提供更多上下文。它缺少删除的后果（如永久性、关联影响）、适用场景和可能的错误情况，仅凭当前信息agent难以全面评估调用影响。

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为0%，描述完全未提及id参数的含义、格式或用途，仅能依靠参数名'id'猜测。描述没有为参数增加任何超出schema的值，无法补偿覆盖率的空白。

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?

描述以明确的动词+资源开头（'Delete a webhook endpoint'），能够与兄弟工具如delete_fiche、update_webhook区分开。但'Fleet/Platform'这一片段含义不明确，可能让agent困惑其具体适用范围，略减清晰度。

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?

描述没有说明何时使用该工具而非替代方案（如update_webhook或revoke_share），也未提供任何使用上下文或排除条件。'Requires Bearer'仅提及认证要求，不属于使用时机指导。

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