Remove an essence message from a QQ group by providing its message ID, helping manage highlighted group content.
Delete essence message
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| message_id | Yes | Message ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations supplied, the one-word action 'Delete' carries the full behavioral burden. It implies mutation/destruction but doesn't state whether deletion is permanent, requires special permissions, or has side effects on group messages.
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 with no filler or redundant phrases. It is appropriately sized for such a simple tool.
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?
Despite the simple schema, the tool is destructive, has no annotations, and lacks any behavioral or situational detail. An agent has no way to know the consequences of calling it or what a successful call returns.
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 coverage is 100%, so message_id is already documented as 'Message ID'. The description adds no additional meaning or constraints about what the ID refers to or how to obtain it.
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 concrete action and object: deleting an essence message. It is clear enough to recognize the tool's purpose, though it doesn't differentiate this from sibling delete_msg or explain what an essence message is.
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 context is given for when to use delete_essence_msg versus alternatives like delete_msg, set_essence_msg, or get_essence_msg_list. There are no usage conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.