rabbitmq_delete_queue

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses the mandatory two-phase confirmation, that confirm defaults to False, that unconfirmed calls return only an impact-estimate report, and cites ADR-0002. It omits permissions required and irreversibility of the delete, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Front-loads the core behavior and the confirmation constraint, then uses compact @param/@return blocks. No sentence is wasted and the structured format is easy to scan.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description covers the confirmation flow, defaults, and all params, and an output schema exists so return formatting need not be spelled out. It could still mention required permissions or irreversibility, but it is substantially complete.

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, and it documents all five parameters (name, confirm, if_unused, if_empty, connection) via @param tags. The explanations are terse but sufficient to understand each parameter's effect beyond the bare schema.

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+resource ('受控删除指定队列' – controlled deletion of the specified queue), which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like rabbitmq_purge_queue or rabbitmq_delete_exchange. It does not explicitly name an alternative, so it falls just 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?

The description implies when to use it via the mandatory confirmation workflow, but it never contrasts this tool with the alternative rabbitmq_purge_queue (which empties a queue without deleting it). Usage is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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