delete_mac_access_control

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Delete MAC access control' without mentioning permanence, side effects, permissions, or reversibility. The destructive nature is implied but not explicitly addressed.

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 short and under-specified. While it is concise in word count, the single sentence merely repeats the tool name and adds no value. It does not earn its place because it offers no useful information beyond the identifier.

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 delete operation with one parameter and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks detail on expected return values, error conditions, and any prerequisites. The minimal description leaves the agent without sufficient context to invoke the tool reliably.

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 0% as the description makes no reference to parameters. The sole parameter 'rule_id' is left undocumented, and there is no explanation of how to obtain it (e.g., from list_mac_access_control). The parameter name is self-explanatory but insufficiently contextualized.

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 MAC 访问控制' (Delete MAC access control) is a direct restatement of the tool name itself. It provides a verb and resource but adds no additional specificity or distinction from sibling tools like delete_acl_rule. This is a tautology.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of how it relates to list_mac_access_control or add_mac_access_control, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The description is purely declarative.

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