receive_and_delete_messages

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'delete' but does not explain that messages are permanently removed or emphasize the destructive nature beyond the tool's name. Missing side effects such as the impact on queue content or potential data loss.

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 concise and front-loaded, starting with the main purpose then listing Args and Returns in a clean format. Every sentence adds value with no filler or repetition.

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?

The description covers purpose, parameters, and return type, which is adequate for a simple two-parameter tool. However, it omits usage context (when to use versus siblings) and does not warn about the destructive deletion behavior, which is significant given no annotations or output schema to clarify.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains wait_seconds as 'long polling wait time in seconds' and queue_name as 'queue name', adding meaning beyond the schema's basic property titles. This is helpful, though it does not mention the default value or allowed ranges.

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 '接收并删除队列中的消息' clearly states it receives and deletes messages from a queue. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_message, delete_queue, list_queues, and create_mns_queue.

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 implies usage as the only tool that consumes messages from a queue, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria. No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it.

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