whistle_value_remove

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'delete specified Value' without mentioning that deletion is destructive, possibly irreversible, or whether it affects other resources. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single, short sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though its brevity borders on under-specification. It earns a 4 for being appropriately concise.

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?

The description is incomplete for a delete operation. It omits important context about irreversibility, effects on related data, and any preconditions. With no output schema and no annotations, the agent cannot assess consequences or expected behavior.

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 input schema already describes the 'name' parameter as 'Value 名称', and the tool description adds no further semantic detail. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate even though the description adds no parameter context.

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' / delete) and the resource ('指定 Value' / specified Value), making the tool's purpose obvious. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling value tools, but the remove verb is distinct enough from get and set.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description gives no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., value_set or value_remove for rules), no prerequisites (such as the value existing), and no mention of side effects or conditions.

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