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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds critical nuance the annotations cannot express: comments and likes attached to the moment are also removed, the deletion is irreversible (不可恢复), login is required (需要登录), and you may only delete your own. That is exactly the value-add beyond structured fields.

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?

Two bracketed, front-loaded blocks: a constraint block (login, scope, effect, irreversibility) and an explicit chain block. No wasted wording; the most decision-relevant facts (irreversible, comments/likes removed, only yours) appear first.

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?

Covers auth requirement, ownership constraint, mutation scope (cascading destruction of comments/likes), reversibility, and the required upstream/downstream chain. For a destructive single-param tool with no output schema, an agent has everything needed to invoke it safely.

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% and the param description already explains where momentId comes from. The description reinforces the 'find then delete' chain but adds no new syntax/format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb (删除/delete) and resource (我的一条消息圈/one of my moments), with the crucial scope qualifier '只能删自己的' (only your own). Distinguishes itself clearly from the many read/list moment tools in the sibling set.

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?

Explicitly prescribes the workflow: use get_user_moments (without userId) to find the moment, read it to the user for confirmation, then call this tool. This is a strong when-to-use and how-to-use signal with an embedded safety gate (user confirmation) that goes well beyond typical guidance.

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