pls_delete_area

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

Description adds '删除不可撤销！' (deletion irreversible) and explains confirm parameter for safety, beyond annotations which already mark as destructive and not read-only.

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?

Description is concise with bullet points, but the line '根据实体类型传入对应字段' is vague and could be more specific.

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?

Covers purpose, confirm, ids, return format, and warning. However, it doesn't specify which fields correspond to entity types, leaving some ambiguity for a destructive operation without output schema.

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 description adds limited value. However, it does clarify confirm must be '确认' and hints at entity-type-specific fields, but the hint is vague.

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?

Description explicitly states '删除区域实体' (delete area entity), with clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like pls_create_area and pls_update_area.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. While deletion is distinct from siblings, prerequisites (e.g., entity not in use) are not mentioned.

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