Taslak Belgeleri Sil

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects, error conditions, permission requirements, or irreversibility. A delete operation warrants more behavioral context.

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 two sentences, both front-loaded. Every word carries meaning; no redundant or extraneous information. Efficient and to the point.

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 tool's complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description lacks important contextual details such as return value, error handling, or behavior on invalid UUIDs. It is overly minimal for a delete operation.

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?

With schema description coverage at 67%, the description adds minimal value beyond the structured schema. It mentions the UUID list requirement but does not elaborate on the purpose or format of other parameters like 'reason' or 'belgeTuru', leaving gaps.

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 the action (deleting) and the resource (unsigned draft documents), which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle cancellations, objections, or other operations on invoices.

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 indicates a prerequisite (UUID list must be provided) but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives or contexts where other tools would be more appropriate.

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