删除本地文稿

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose two key traits: the operation is local-only and does not touch the Tomato backend, and the default confirm=false performs a preview rather than an actual delete. It stops short of stating reversibility or what happens after a real delete.

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?

One compact sentence that front-loads the scope constraint and the safe-default behavior, with no 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 two-parameter delete tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the two things an agent most needs: scope (local-only) and the dry-run default. Marginal gaps remain around irreversibility and return behavior, but these are minor.

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 100% and both parameters are already documented in the schema, including confirm's default-false meaning. The description restates the preview behavior but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (删除/delete) and resource (本地文稿库条目/local article library entry), and explicitly scopes it as local-only, which distinguishes it from the remote sibling delete_short_story_tomato. An agent can identify the target from the description alone.

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 clause '不影响番茄后台' signals the condition under which this tool is appropriate (local-only deletion, not backend mutation), which helps route against backend-facing siblings. It does not, however, name an alternative tool or state when-not to use it explicitly.

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