Xoá nhóm Zalo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the delete action but does not disclose whether the deletion is permanent, whether notifications stop immediately, whether it is idempotent, or what happens if the id does not exist. There is no contradiction, but the transparency is minimal.

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 wasted words. It efficiently conveys the exact action and object, which is appropriate for a simple delete operation.

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 one-parameter delete tool, the description is nearly complete: it names the exact resource and the schema documents the id thoroughly. It falls just short of a 5 because it omits optional but useful context such as irreversibility, success/failure behavior, or requirements, especially given the absence of annotations and an 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?

The schema describes the only parameter fully, including its purpose and UUIDv6 format, so the description does not need to repeat parameter details. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Xoá' and clearly identifies the resource as a Zalo group notification configuration ('cấu hình thông báo nhóm Zalo'). This distinguishes it from sibling operations like create, update, test, and list, and clarifies that it is the configuration being deleted, not an actual Zalo group.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention how to obtain the id via monapay_list_zalo_groups, nor does it provide conditions such as 'use only when you want to permanently remove a group notification configuration' or any exclusions.

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