Tencent Cloud Live MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action ('delete') without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention permissions required, whether deletion is permanent/reversible, side effects (e.g., impact on ongoing streams), or error handling, which is inadequate for a destructive 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 appropriately concise with a brief purpose statement and parameter/return notes. However, the structure could be improved by front-loading critical information (e.g., deletion implications) rather than burying details in a simple list.

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?

Given the complexity of a deletion tool with no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete behavioral disclosure, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on what '请求ID' (request ID) means in returns, error cases, or confirmation of deletion success, leaving gaps for safe agent invocation.

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 description adds minimal semantics by naming the parameter ('template_id: 模版ID'), but with 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter, this provides basic clarification. Since there are 0 parameters with schema descriptions, the baseline is 4, as the description compensates slightly by identifying the parameter.

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 '删除转码模板' (delete transcode template) states the verb and resource clearly, but it's vague about what 'transcode template' refers to in this live streaming context. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like delete_live_transcode_rule, which suggests similar deletion operations on related resources.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., template must exist), exclusions, or relationships to sibling tools like create_live_transcode_template or delete_live_transcode_rule, leaving usage context unclear.

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