pospal_delete_product

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses irrecoverability ('不可恢复'), a key behavioral trait for a delete operation. It does not mention required permissions, rate limits, or side effects like cascading deletes, but for a straightforward delete, the disclosure is minimally adequate.

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, front-loaded sentence that concisely conveys purpose, risk, and usage constraint. No wasted words; every part earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no annotations, output schema exists), the description covers the essential purpose and main risk. However, it lacks parameter explanation and output details. For a minimal viable description, it meets basic needs but leaves gaps that could lead to incorrect invocation.

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 schema has one parameter (product_id) with 0% description coverage, and the description adds no meaning to it. It only says 'delete product' without explaining what product_id is or how to obtain it. The description should compensate for the lack of schema documentation but fails to do so.

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 (delete product) and the resource (product). It adds crucial context that it's irrecoverable and for test accounts only, distinguishing it from sibling tools like update or create.

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 explicitly limits usage to test accounts ('仅测试账号使用'), providing a clear when-to-use condition. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, but the constraint is sufficient for most scenarios.

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