audio_projects_deletePermanently delete the rendered audio file(s). This action is not reversible, please be sure before deleting.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Unique ID of the audio project. This value is returned by all of the POST APIs that create an audio. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / contextRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as \"a user\", \"the customer\", or \"an account\". Example: \"Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution.\"",
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / contextAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as \"a user\", \"the customer\", or \"an account\". Example: \"Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution.\"",
+ "type": "string"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is structured data. The description reinforces irreversibility and adds that the deleted artifact is the rendered audio file(s), but does not disclose side effects such as whether the project record survives or whether deletion cascades.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its permanence. 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 single-parameter destructive tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, this is minimally adequate. It omits side effects (record deletion vs file deletion), failure modes, and prerequisites, which an agent calling a permanent delete would benefit from knowing.
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?
With one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents the id fully, including where the value comes from. The description adds nothing about the id, so the baseline 3 for schema-heavy coverage 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 ('Permanently delete') and a specific resource ('the rendered audio file(s)'), which lets an agent distinguish it from audio_projects_retrieve_details and the parallel image_projects_delete / video_projects_delete siblings.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor prerequisites such as ownership or project state. The only directive is a generic caution ('please be sure before deleting'), which is a warning rather than a usage rule.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.