Permanently delete a dataset and all its data. This action cannot be undone. Only the dataset owner can delete it. Requires AUTARIO_API_KEY.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dataset_id | Yes | The UUID of the dataset to permanently delete |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Goes beyond annotations by detailing consequences (permanent, irreversible), authorization (owner only), and authentication (requires API key). No contradiction with annotations.
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?
Three concise sentences, front-loaded with main action, then consequences, then prerequisites. No unnecessary words.
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?
Adequately covers action, irreversibility, ownership, and auth. Could mention post-deletion behavior, but acceptable given destructive nature and no output schema.
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 covers parameter fully (100% coverage). Description mentions dataset_id implicitly but adds no new semantics beyond schema description.
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?
Clearly states the verb 'delete' and resource 'dataset' with emphasis on permanence. Differentiates from sibling tools like create_dataset and get_dataset_info.
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?
Explicitly warns that deletion is irreversible and restricted to dataset owners, providing clear when-not conditions. Lacks explicit alternatives but context suffices.
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.
Most tools are strongly domain-specific with clear boundaries, especially the 360 reports and dataset/chart CRUD tools. Some overlap exists around driver analysis (find_drivers, what_matters, decompose_drivers) and dataset discovery (search_datasets, discover_by_topic, list_indicators), but the descriptions make the intended use cases mostly distinguishable.
The vast majority of tools follow a clear snake_case verb_noun or get_noun pattern, e.g. list_connectors, refresh_connector, query_dataset, delete_dataset. Minor deviations such as calculate, describe, bubble_or_not, what_matters, and the 360-style report names keep it from being perfectly uniform.
48 tools is far beyond the 3-15 range and even beyond the 25-tool threshold for a heavy surface. The platform is broad and the tools are organized into domains, but the sheer number creates a high selection burden for an agent and suggests the server is trying to cover too many workflows in one toolset.
The toolset covers dataset lifecycle, chart lifecycle, data discovery, querying, statistics, app context, connectors, and admin reports remarkably well. Notable gaps are the lack of a delete_chart tool and no row-level update/delete for datasets, but agents can generally work around these or treat them as intentional platform constraints.
