删除预处理信息

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly flags the operation as high risk, states that membership is required, and documents the unified response format. It does not detail irreversibility or side effects, but the high-risk warning partially covers that.

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 compact and structured: endpoint, risk level, membership requirement, request parameter, and response format are all included with no filler. Each sentence carries useful information.

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 single-parameter delete operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation details: endpoint, required parameter, risk, membership, and response shape. It could add error cases or authentication specifics, but nothing critical is missing for basic use.

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% and the schema already describes preId as the preprocessing information ID. The description adds that it is required and labels it as 预处理编号, but this largely repeats the schema rather than providing deeper semantic meaning.

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 ('删除' / DELETE), a clear resource ('预处理'), and the endpoint path. It also adds high-risk and membership context, making it easy to distinguish from sibling operations like open_pre_add, open_pre_edit, open_pre_list, and open_pre_detail.

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 makes clear this tool is for deleting preprocessing information and that membership is required. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the usage context is unambiguous given the DELETE verb and resource.

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