Delete Ip Speed Limit

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 and fails to meet it. It says nothing about irreversibility, required permissions, behavior when the rule_id does not exist, or any other consequence of this destructive operation.

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 three-word phrase is not conciseness but under-specification; there is no waste, but almost no content either, and nothing is front-loaded because nothing else exists.

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 delete tool with no annotations, no parameter documentation, and no usage guidance, the definition is materially incomplete. An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but that alone does not compensate for the missing identifier sourcing and safety context.

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 the description does not mention rule_id at all. With only one required integer parameter it is partly self-explanatory by name, but the agent gets no hint that the ID comes from list_ip_speed_limits or what format it takes.

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?

"删除 IP 限速" states a specific verb (delete) and resource (IP speed limit), so the operation is identifiable. However, it is essentially the title restated in another language and adds no differentiation from siblings such as add_ip_speed_limit or delete_mac_speed_limit beyond what the name already conveys.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite, and no mention of alternatives such as list_ip_speed_limits for obtaining a rule ID. The agent must infer all usage context from the tool name alone.

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