ds_raw_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'pass through,' implying a proxy, but does not state that this is a potentially destructive operation, whether any safety checks exist, or what the response format is. This is insufficient for a DELETE 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?

The description is a single short sentence that states the core functionality with no wasted words. It is structured clearly and ear-loads the main idea.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and one undocumented parameter, the description is too sparse. It fails to specify the expected path format, the side effects of deleting a resource, or any error handling. This leaves the agent without enough context to use the tool confidently.

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%, and the description does not explain the 'path' parameter beyond its name. While 'path' is somewhat self-evident as the API path, the description could benefit from a concrete format or example. The parameter adds no additional meaning beyond the schema field itself.

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 tool passes DELETE requests through to the DolphinScheduler API, using a specific HTTP verb and the target resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ds_raw_get, ds_raw_put, and ds_raw_post, though it does not elaborate on the exact semantic effect of the DELETE operation.

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 raw delete versus the many specialized delete tools (e.g., ds_delete_project, ds_delete_workflow) or the raw_get/put/post siblings. There is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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