nacos_deregister_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It indicates a manual deregistration/offline mutation, but omits whether the action is reversible, what permissions are required, how existing traffic or health checks are affected, and how the ephemeral flag changes behavior. This is too thin for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant clauses. The operation and target are conveyed immediately, which is appropriate for a short definition.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, yet the description is only a one-line purpose statement. It does not address side effects, usage context, or parameter nuances, leaving an agent with insufficient context beyond the structured schema to invoke it confidently.

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 100%, so parameter meanings are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no further parameter semantics, such as guidance on using ephemeral, namespaceId, or groupName during deregistration, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 注销下线 (deregister/offline) a specified 实例节点 (instance node). It clearly describes the core operation, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as nacos_register_instance or nacos_update_instance, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. The word 手动 (manually) implies deliberate invocation but does not explain when an agent should choose this tool over nacos_update_instance, nacos_register_instance, or other lifecycle tools.

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