delete_customer

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

由於無 annotations，描述承擔全部責任。它清楚揭露「永久刪除客戶記錄，不可復原」以及「客戶相關的訂單紀錄可能仍保留」等重要副作用，並標註 [WRITE] 屬寫入操作。此資訊足以讓 agent 了解風險。

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?

描述以分段（用途、API、回傳、副作用）呈現，每個句子都有實質資訊，無冗詞，長度適中。

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?

此工具為單一參數的刪除操作，複雜度不高。描述包含用途、API 路徑、回傳結構與副作用，在無輸出 schema 下仍能提供完整指引。

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?

輸入 schema 已完整描述 customer_id（客戶內部 ID），覆蓋率 100%。描述本身未對參數增加額外語意，因此依據基準分數給 3 分。

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?

描述開頭明確標示「[WRITE] 刪除客戶」並說明用途為「從 Shopline 商店中刪除客戶記錄」，同時提供典型情境（測試資料、GDPR）。此描述以特定動詞+資源+範圍，且與其他客戶工具（list_customers、update_customer）清楚區隔。

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?

說明「通常用於清除測試資料或 GDPR 合規需求」提供明確使用情境。但未提及何時不應使用或與替代工具的比較（例如 update_customer），因此無排除條款。

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