health_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is partially covered. The description adds the preview-first workflow and the requirement to obtain explicit user instruction, but does not disclose scope of deletion, irreversibility, or return behavior beyond what annotations and the dry_run field already imply.

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 with no filler, and the deletion purpose is front-loaded ahead of the preview guidance. Efficient and well-ordered, though terse to the point of under-delivering detail.

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 destructive, open-world delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential preview-before-delete workflow but omits what deletion affects, whether it is reversible, and the meaning of data_type/names. Adequate but with clear gaps given the tool's risk profile.

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 only 50%: dry_run and idempotency_key are documented in the schema, but data_type and names have no descriptions anywhere. The description's phrase "指定資料點" loosely gestures at the targets but does not clarify the names array or the data_type values, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "明確刪除指定資料點" (explicitly delete specified data points). This is clearly a delete operation distinguishable from siblings like health_create and health_update, though it does not name any sibling explicitly.

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?

It conveys a usage workflow — preview first and obtain the user's deletion instruction — which implies required prerequisites before acting. However, it offers no guidance on when to choose this tool versus alternatives, leaving usage implied rather than explicit.

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