delete_product

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly lists side effects: permanent deletion without recovery, possible retention of order line items, and immediate removal from the storefront. It also indicates the operation is a write via '[WRITE]' and names the exact API call, providing adequate transparency for a delete operation.

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 well-structured with labeled sections (用途, API, 回傳結構, 副作用) and is reasonably concise. It avoids unnecessary fluff, though the inclusion of the API endpoint could be seen as slightly redundant given the schema, but it still adds value by clarifying the underlying call.

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 delete tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is quite complete. It covers the purpose, typical use case, API endpoint, return structure, and side effects. The only missing piece is permission/authorization requirements, but that is not critical for a single-resource delete 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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage with a description for the single parameter product_id ('商品內部 ID'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool deletes a product permanently from Shopline, using the specific verb '刪除' (delete) and the resource '商品' (product). It distinguishes itself from siblings like delete_product_variation and update_product by explicitly mentioning permanent deletion of the product record and the API endpoint DELETE /v1/products/{product_id}.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: '通常用於清除下架商品或測試資料' (usually for removing discontinued products or test data). While it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, the typical use case is stated, which is enough to guide an AI agent.

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