yuque_delete_repo

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load and does meaningfully more than the schema: it warns the operation is irreversible and documents the confirm token as an accidental-deletion guard. It still omits permission/authorization requirements, whether cascade effects occur (docs, members), and what the response returns.

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-loaded with the destructive nature and the required token, and the whole description is one tight sentence fragment. The trailing reference pointer (在 references/api/repo_api.md) is mildly distracting but genuinely useful for deeper detail.

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 3-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the crucial safety and irreversibility context plus the endpoint. Missing authorization prerequisites and side effects on contained docs/members keep it short of complete.

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 book_id and confirm are already fully documented in the schema. The description repeats the confirm='DELETE' contract without adding format or edge-case detail beyond it, 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 and resource ('Delete a repo') plus the underlying endpoint (DELETE /repos/:id), which immediately separates it from siblings like yuque_update_repo, yuque_create_repo, and yuque_get_repo. The irreversibility note sharpens the scope further.

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 gives a strong precondition ('Requires confirm="DELETE"') but never says when to pick this over alternatives such as soft-deletion via yuque_restore_recycle or the recycle-bin tools, nor when deletion is inappropriate. Usage is implied by the verb rather than explained.

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