Delete a recurring task and all its uncompleted future instances.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The recurring task template's ID, from list_recurring_tasks or create_recurring_task. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | Yes | ||
| title | No | ||
| message | No | ||
| variant | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / id / descriptionPrevious value: -"The recurring task template's ID, as returned by create_recurring_task."New value: +"The recurring task template's ID, from list_recurring_tasks or create_recurring_task."Input schema / properties / id / descriptionPrevious value: -"The recurring task's ID, as returned by create_recurring_task or list_recurring_tasks."New value: +"The recurring task template's ID, as returned by create_recurring_task."Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "id": "5c3d2e1f0a9b8c7d6e5f4a3b2c1d0e9f"
+ }
+]Input schema / properties / id / descriptionAdded value: +"The recurring task's ID, as returned by create_recurring_task or list_recurring_tasks."Input schema / properties / id / examplesAdded value: +[
+ "5c3d2e1f0a9b8c7d6e5f4a3b2c1d0e9f"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description usefully extends that by scoping the destruction to uncompleted future instances. However, it leaves open what happens to already-completed occurrences and their history, and never states the action is irreversible.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope constraint is attached directly to the verb rather than buried. Nothing to trim.
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?
With annotations covering destructiveness, a fully documented single parameter, and an output schema present, the description is nearly sufficient. The residual gap is the fate of completed occurrences and history retention, which an agent deleting a series would want to know.
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 the id description already tells the agent the value comes from list_recurring_tasks or create_recurring_task. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the 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 (Delete) and resource (recurring task) plus a scope qualifier (all uncompleted future instances), which cleanly separates it from delete_task and delete_recurring_calendar_event. It does not name an alternative tool, so it falls just short of the top tier.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance: nothing tells the agent whether to delete the whole series versus skipping/deferring a single occurrence, and no prerequisites (ownership, permissions) are mentioned. Usage is only inferable from the verb.
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.