wps_word_delete_comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool deletes a comment and that the index starts at 1, but does not mention whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, or what happens if the index is invalid. With no annotations, a detailed behavioral description would be expected, but these details are missing.

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 very concise with two short sentences, no wasted words. However, it lacks some behavioral detail that might be necessary, but for a simple deletion operation it is appropriately sized.

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 single-parameter deletion tool with full schema coverage and sibling context available, the description provides minimum viability. It explains how to get the index (wps_word_get_comments) and the index base (1), but does not describe return values (no output schema exists) or error handling. It is adequate but leaves gaps.

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% with a single parameter that already describes itself as '批注序号，从 1 开始' (comment sequence number, starting from 1). The tool description repeats this information, adding no extra semantic value. Baseline is 3 due to high schema coverage.

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 explicitly states the tool deletes a specific comment (删除指定批注), which is a clear verb+resource pairing. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like wps_word_add_comment, wps_word_get_comments, and wps_word_resolve_revisions, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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?

The description advises that the index starts from 1 and directs the user to use wps_word_get_comments to obtain the index. This provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for different operations.

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