eda_dmt_panel_delete_panel

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'delete panel' and returns a boolean, but does not disclose irreversibility, side effects, required permissions, or what happens if the panel does not exist. The destructive nature is implied but not elaborated.

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 highly concise and front-loaded with the function signature, followed by a one-line Chinese summary and return type. Every element is useful and there is no filler.

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 simple delete operation with no output schema, the description and signature cover the core mechanics, including the boolean return value. However, it does not explicitly state that panelUuid is required (the schema marks required parameters as 0), nor does it mention error behavior, reversibility, or whether the operation depends on the active window.

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 signature adds meaningful parameter semantics by naming 'panelUuid' with type 'string' and specifying the official call order, which compensates for the generic 'args' array in the input schema. It does not, however, clarify the optional windowId parameter or parameter formatting beyond what the schema already states.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'dmt_Panel.deletePanel' and '删除面板' (delete panel). The signature makes the operation unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling panel operations like copy, create, or modify.

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 implies usage: use this when you need to delete a panel. However, it does not provide explicit context, prerequisites, or alternatives, such as when to use panel modification versus deletion.

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