Remove document

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the important trait that deletion is soft: the document goes to the workspace trash (数据历史) and is recoverable. It omits permission requirements, idempotency, and what happens when the ID/path is invalid.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action, and the recoverability detail is placed where it is most useful. The 'Accepts a document ID or a path' clause is redundant with the schema and could be cut.

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 one-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral fact (soft delete with recovery), which is what an agent most needs to act safely. Remaining gaps are permission and failure-mode details that are secondary at this complexity.

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 100% with the single 'doc' parameter already documented as 'Document ID or path', and the description repeats exactly that. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting and the description adds no format or syntax detail.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a document') and clarifies accepted identifier forms. It does not explicitly contrast with the nearby delete_block or move_document siblings, so an agent must infer that this targets whole documents rather than blocks.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as move_document for relocation versus deletion. The recoverability note implies the operation is safe-ish, but the description never says when an agent should choose this over other mutation tools.

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