delete_product_review

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly warns that the review is permanently deleted and cannot be restored, and that the product's review count and average rating will be updated. It also documents the return structure and the exact HTTP method and path, giving comprehensive insight into the operation's effects.

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-organized into labeled sections (purpose, API call, return structure, side effects). Every sentence is informative and earns its place. It is concise yet thorough, with no redundant filler.

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 single-parameter delete operation, the description is highly complete. It covers the purpose, the exact API call, the return structure, and side effects. Since there is no output schema, the description provides return format details, ensuring the agent knows what to expect. The absence of annotations is fully compensated by the description's rich behavioral information.

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 already provides complete coverage for the single parameter (comment_id) with a description ('評論 ID'). The tool description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema provides; it only mentions comment_id in the API URL context, which does not enhance parameter understanding. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 starts with '[WRITE] 刪除單筆商品評論' clearly stating the action (delete) and resource (single product review), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like bulk_delete_product_reviews, update_product_review, and create_product_review. The specific API endpoint is also provided, reinforcing the tool's exact operation.

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?

It provides clear usage context by stating the tool is suitable for removing violating, malicious, or test reviews. While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like bulk_delete_product_reviews, the 'single' qualifier and purpose cover the main usage scenario adequately.

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