delete_object

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. Deletion is destructive and irreversible, but the description says nothing about permanence, permission requirements, error behavior for missing objects, or whether the bucket is auto-derived. The single word 删除 implies a write, but no operational traits are disclosed.

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 short phrase, efficient and front-loaded, but so terse that it under-specifies rather than being a model of concision. It doesn't waste words, but it also doesn't earn its place with useful content.

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?

A destructive mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter documentation. The description should carry the behavioral and parameter burden, but it only restates the name. An agent lacks enough information to call 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 0% and both parameters (key, bucket) are undocumented in the schema. The description mentions neither parameter by name or meaning, leaving the agent to infer that key identifies the object and bucket identifies the target bucket. With 2 params at 0% coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 (删除, delete) and resource (对象, object), with the scope qualifier 单个 (single). This distinguishes it from delete_objects_batch and delete_objects_by_prefix. However it doesn't name the bucket/key identity concept that differentiates it from other single-object tools.

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?

No when-to-use guidance. Given three sibling delete tools (singleton, batch, by-prefix), the description gives no explicit guidance for choosing between them beyond the word 单个, which implies but does not state the alternatives.

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