boss_watch_remove

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, required permissions, or any irreversible consequences of deletion. The availability info is not behavioral.

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 very short but includes irrelevant availability information in brackets, which reduces conciseness. The core action is stated but could be cleaner.

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 simple delete tool with no output schema, the description lacks completeness. It does not mention return values, success/failure behavior, or any prerequisites, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool.

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 one parameter 'name' described as '监控名称'. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, earning the baseline score.

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 starts with '删除指定监控' which clearly indicates deleting a specified monitoring (watch). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like boss_watch_add or boss_watch_list, and the appended availability information adds noise.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description lacks information about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or context for deletion.

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