pls_delete_anchor

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the destructiveHint annotation by stating '删除不可撤销！' (deletion is irreversible) and requiring a confirmation parameter. This provides helpful safety awareness without contradicting annotations.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, required parameters, return format, and a warning. No redundant or filler content.

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 delete tool with no output schema, the description covers essential aspects: action, required inputs, return format, and destructiveness. It does not detail error handling or edge cases but is adequate for a straightforward operation.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already documents all parameters. The description reiterates the confirm constraint and ids requirement but adds limited additional meaning. The vague note about '根据实体类型传入对应字段' adds some context but remains unclear.

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 explicitly states '删除基站实体' (delete base station entity), clearly identifying the action and resource. The tool name aligns with this purpose, and it distinguishes itself from sibling delete tools like pls_delete_tag or pls_delete_person.

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 implies usage for deleting base stations but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or when not to use it.

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