yuque_delete_repo

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It does disclose the destructive nature ('Delete') and the requirement for confirmation, which are important behavioral traits. However, it omits details about what gets destroyed (e.g., associated docs), authentication prerequisites, or whether the action is reversible.

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 sentence with no wasted words and is easy to scan. It could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose, but it is appropriately concise 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?

This is a destructive tool with no annotations, no output schema, and three required parameters. The description only mentions confirmation, leaving the agent to infer the exact confirmation mechanism and side effects. A more complete description would specify that `confirm_text` likely needs to match the repository name or some identifier.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for explaining the three parameters. It only hints that confirmation is involved via 'requires confirmation', but does not explain what `confirm_text` should contain, how `namespace` is formatted, or the relationship between `confirm` and `confirm_text`.

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 action ('Delete') and the resource ('Yuque repository'), using a specific verb+resource structure. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like yuque_delete_doc and yuque_delete_group by naming 'repository'.

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, nor exclusions or contexts where deletion is appropriate. The description only states that confirmation is required, offering no decision-making support.

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