删除工作表

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. '删除' (delete) clearly implies destructive behavior, and '不能删除最后一张' adds a meaningful operational constraint. However, it doesn't disclose whether deletion is reversible, whether confirmation is needed, what happens to data in the sheet, or the return value on success/failure.

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 extremely concise at one sentence with two clauses. Both carry meaning: the action and the critical constraint. Zero wasted words.

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 2-parameter tool with a fully-covered schema and no output schema, the description is adequate but could be richer. The destructive nature combined with no annotations means the behavioral context (irreversibility, data loss) is left unsaid. The last-sheet constraint is documented, which is the most operationally important caveat, but the risk profile of the operation is under-emphasized.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (filePath with path format examples and supported extensions, sheetName with character and length constraints) are well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, meriting the baseline 3.

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 a specific verb+resource ('删除指定工作表' - delete specified worksheet) and adds a critical scope constraint ('不能删除最后一张' - cannot delete the last one). It distinguishes from siblings (add_sheet, rename_sheet, list_sheets) clearly as the deletion operation, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 includes one key usage constraint (cannot delete the last sheet), which is valuable operational guidance. However, it doesn't explicitly explain when to use this vs alternatives like add_sheet or rename_sheet, nor mention any prerequisites or conditions beyond the last-sheet restriction.

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