pipeline_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While '删除' implies a destructive operation, the description doesn't specify whether this deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or what happens to associated data. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 brief and structured with a title and parameter section, but it's somewhat sparse and could be more front-loaded with critical information. It avoids unnecessary verbosity but may be too minimal for optimal clarity.

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 (a deletion operation with no annotations or output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, error conditions, return values, and differentiation from siblings, making it insufficient for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 the parameter 'id' with a brief label ('Pipeline ID'), but schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the schema provides no additional documentation. The description adds minimal semantic context (identifying it as a Pipeline ID) but doesn't explain format, constraints, or where to obtain it. This meets the baseline for partial compensation.

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 ('删除' meaning delete) and the resource ('Ingest Pipeline'), which provides a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'pipeline_get' or 'pipeline_create', which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'pipeline_get' or 'pipeline_create', nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. It simply states what the tool does without contextual usage information.

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