project_delete

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

无注解，描述承担全部行为披露责任。它明确指出了关键副作用（任务不删除但失去关联），这是重要信息。但未提及权限要求、可逆性、返回结果等，对删除操作而言，信息仍不完整。

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?

单句描述，包含了核心操作和副作用，无冗余信息，结构高效。

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?

工具简单（1个参数），无输出schema，副作用说明充分。缺少返回格式和权限信息，但对简单删除操作影响不大，整体完整度较高。

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已提供id参数的描述（项目ID），覆盖率100%，描述未添加额外参数语义，符合基线3分。

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?

描述明确指定动词'删除'和资源'项目'，并说明了对任务的副作用，与project_create、project_list等兄弟工具清晰区分，不存在歧义。

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?

描述未明确说明何时使用此工具或排除其他工具，但删除操作本身意图清晰，且无替代工具需要区分。缺乏对前提条件（如项目是否存在）的说明。

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