delete_countdown

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that the action is irreversible and that confirm=true is mandatory, which are the two behavioral traits that matter most for a destructive tool; however, it does not describe permissions, the return value, or what happens on failure.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the safety constraint. No filler or redundant restatement.

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 simple, two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what is deleted, the irreversibility, and the confirmation requirement. The only real gap is that it lacks any mention of what a successful deletion returns, which is minor.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must supply the missing parameter meaning. It fully explains the non-obvious confirm parameter (must be true) but does not add details about id; that omission is minor because id is self-evident.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource (删除一个倒计时), which lets an agent distinguish this tool from delete_todo and delete_habit. It is not a tautology, although it does not explicitly name those sibling alternatives.

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 gives clear preconditions for use: it says to confirm with the user before deleting and requires confirm=true. It does not name any scenario in which the tool should not be used or point to an alternative tool, which keeps it short of a 5.

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