bulk_delete_product_reviews

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

No annotations provided, so description fully covers behavioral traits: permanent deletion, updates to product review counts and ratings, and partial failure scenarios. This is comprehensive for a destructive write operation.

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 well-structured with clear sections (用途, API, 回傳結構, 副作用). It is informative but could be slightly more concise; every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

Given the simple input schema (one parameter) and no output schema, the description covers return structure (dict with success, resource_id, message, deleted_count) and side effects, making it complete for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 clear description and example for comment_ids. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so 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 clearly states it batch deletes product reviews, with a verb (批次刪除) and specific resource (商品評論). It distinguishes from siblings like delete_product_review (single) and bulk_update_product_reviews (update).

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 provides explicit use cases (batch cleanup of test data or violating reviews) and mentions partial failure behavior. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, which would improve clarity.

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