alias_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. '删除别名' (delete alias) implies a destructive mutation, but the description fails to mention: whether this requires specific permissions, whether the deletion is permanent or reversible, what validation occurs, what happens to associated resources, or what the response looks like. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is critically inadequate.

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 extremely brief with just three lines: title, then two parameter lines. While technically concise, it's under-specified rather than efficiently informative. The structure is basic but clear. However, the brevity comes at the cost of missing essential context that would help an agent use the tool correctly.

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 2 required parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what an alias is in this context, what deletion entails, what permissions are needed, what validation occurs, what the response contains, or how this differs from related tools. The agent lacks critical information to use this tool safely and effectively.

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?

The description lists parameters 'index: 索引名称' (index name) and 'name: 别名名称' (alias name), which provides basic semantic mapping. However, with 0% schema description coverage, the schema provides only titles 'Index' and 'Name' without context. The description adds minimal value by specifying these are names, but doesn't explain format requirements, constraints, or relationships between index and alias parameters.

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 '删除别名' (delete alias) is a tautology that merely restates the tool name 'alias_delete' in Chinese. It doesn't specify what type of alias is being deleted (e.g., Elasticsearch index alias) or provide any distinguishing context from sibling tools like 'alias_create' or 'alias_get'. While the verb 'delete' is clear, the resource 'alias' is too generic without domain context.

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 provides absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites, when deletion is appropriate, what happens after deletion, or how this differs from related tools like 'alias_actions' or 'index_delete'. The agent receives no contextual framing for this destructive operation.

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