delete_account_book

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

No annotations are provided (e.g., destructiveHint), and the description only says 'delete' which implies mutation but does not disclose critical behaviors such as whether deletion is permanent, whether it requires owner/admin permissions, whether related data (e.g., bills under the account book) is cascaded, or whether confirmation is required. The description also doesn't mention the HTTP 200 success response or error handling. This is a significant gap for a destructive 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 very concise: one sentence with two key pieces of information (endpoint and required fields). It front-loads the operation name and endpoint. It earns a 4 because it is efficient, though it could benefit from one extra clause about behavioral impact (e.g., permanent deletion), but that's more for completeness than conciseness.

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 that this is a destructive operation with no annotations, no output schema, and nested objects, the description is incomplete. It doesn't specify ownership/authorization requirements, what happens to associated data, or the success response format. The description is enough to execute the call but lacks the safety and side-effect information an agent needs to decide if it's safe to invoke without human confirmation. The lack of behavioral transparency makes it insufficiently complete for a high-risk tool.

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 description has 100% coverage: it describes the 'entity' parameter as an account book object containing the primary key accountBookId. The description adds the important detail that 'userId' must also be included in the entity, which is not explicit in the schema (additionalProperties is open). This adds value over the schema, so it's at least at the baseline of 3. However, it doesn't clarify the exact type of 'userId' (string?) or how the entity is structured beyond the key fields.

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 ('删除账本' - delete account book), identifies the resource (账本/account book), and includes the HTTP endpoint (POST /accountBook/deleteAccountBook). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like save_account_book and get_account_members by specifying deletion, so an agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 gives clear context that this is a delete operation and explicitly mentions the need to include the primary key (accountBookId) and userId. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus other delete tools (e.g., delete_reimbursement, delete_bill), though the name and endpoint make the target resource obvious. It also doesn't mention prerequisites like authentication or ownership checks, which are inferable from the context but not stated.

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