Delete product

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Delete product' without explaining side effects, such as whether the deletion is hard or soft, whether it cascades to related records, or whether permissions are required. The 'items.delete' hint adds little beyond the already-implied destructive nature.

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 text is extremely brief, consisting of only the tool name and an API reference. While this is concise, it borders on under-specification rather than efficient communication. The core purpose is clear, but the minimal wording leaves out essential usage and parameter context.

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 one parameter, the description might seem sufficient at first glance, but it lacks context about return values, error conditions, or any behavioral caveats. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more guidance than just the action.

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 defines a single parameter 'manage_number' with no description, and the schema description coverage is 0%. The tool description does not explain what 'manage_number' is or how to obtain it. The description completely fails to compensate for the missing schema information.

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 states '商品削除' which translates to 'Delete product', clearly indicating a destructive action on a product resource. The appended 'items.delete' references the underlying API endpoint, and the tool name itself is unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from siblings like rms_upsert_product and rms_patch_product, which create or update products.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no prerequisites, no warnings about products that may be referenced by orders or other entities, and no mention of when deletion might be inappropriate. The only context is the tool's name and description, which do not address usage scenarios.

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