Delete a specified file from a QQ group by providing the group ID and file ID, with an optional busid for file type. Use it to remove unwanted or outdated group files via NapCat OneBot 11.
删除指定的 QQ 群文件 (NapCat OneBot 11: delete_group_file)。 :param group_id: 群号 :param file_id: 群文件 ID :param busid: 文件类型 busid，默认 102
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| busid | No | 文件类型 busid，默认 102 | |
| file_id | Yes | 群文件 ID | |
| group_id | Yes | 群号 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falsev1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the mutation only through the verb '删除' and names the backend action, but says nothing about required permissions, whether deletion is reversible, what happens to the file after removal, or error conditions.
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 one-line purpose is front-loaded and clear, but the :param block duplicates information already present in the input schema, so those lines do not fully earn their place. Still compact and not bloated.
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 no annotations and no output schema, the definition should explain permissions, irreversibility, and how to obtain a valid file_id. None of that is present, leaving the agent under-equipped beyond the raw parameter list.
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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The :param lines merely restate the schema descriptions verbatim ('群号', '群文件 ID', '文件类型 busid，默认 102') without adding format, source, or valid-value guidance beyond what the schema already provides.
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?
States a specific verb+resource ('删除指定的 QQ 群文件' / delete the specified QQ group file) and identifies the underlying OneBot 11 action. It is distinguishable from the delete_group_folder sibling by name and object type, but the description never explicitly contrasts them.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as delete_group_folder, get_group_root_files, or get_group_files_by_folder — an agent needing a file_id has no hint that it must first enumerate files. No prerequisites or constraints are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.