zentao_delete_bug

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The word 'delete' implies destruction, but there is no detail on whether deletion is permanent, soft, or requires special permissions. For a mutation tool, this lack of context reduces transparency.

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 extremely short (one phrase) but under-specified. Conciseness is not valuable if it omits essential information; the description fails to earn its place by not providing utility beyond the name.

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 delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, a minimal description might suffice, but the lack of behavioral details (e.g., reversibility, side effects) makes it incomplete. Sibling tools indicate a CRUD context, yet no differentiation is offered.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with a basic description ('Bug ID'). The tool description adds no extra meaning, but the schema itself is sufficient. 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?

The description '删除禅道 Bug' is a direct translation of the tool name, offering no additional specificity. It restates the action and resource without clarifying scope or distinguishing from sibling tools like zentao_list_bugs or zentao_update_bug.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites, consequences of deletion, or whether other operations should be performed first.

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