yuque_delete_doc

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does add genuinely useful behavior: that deletion is a soft delete to the recycle bin and that a 'DELETE' confirmation token is enforced as a safety guard. It omits permissions/auth requirements, whether the action is reversible from here, and what happens to the document's references.

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?

Front-loads the core action and effect, then the guard, then the endpoint. The trailing pointer to references/api/doc_api.md is a bit of an afterthought but doesn't obscure the key information. No wasted 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 destructive, unannotated tool with no output schema, the essentials (soft delete, confirm guard, endpoint) are covered. However, auth/permission requirements and the impact on the doc's placement or history are not addressed, leaving meaningful gaps for an irreversible-looking action.

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%, so all four parameters including the confirm token are already documented in the schema. The description's restatement of confirm='DELETE' duplicates rather than extends the schema, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Delete a document') and crucially clarifies the effect is a soft delete ('moves to recycle bin'), which distinguishes it semantically from a permanent delete such as a recycle-destroy tool. It does not, however, name the sibling it differs from (e.g. yuque_destroy_recycle or yuque_web_delete_doc), so an agent must infer the distinction.

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 explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over the web variant, over yuque_destroy_recycle, or what prerequisites (ownership/permissions) apply. The 'moves to recycle bin' note hints at reversibility but is not framed as usage guidance.

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