Delete Shared Markdown
delete_sharePermanently delete a share using its id and edit token.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The share id (the URL path segment) | |
| edit_token | Yes | Edit token returned when the share was created |
delete_sharePermanently delete a share using its id and edit token.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The share id (the URL path segment) | |
| edit_token | Yes | Edit token returned when the share was created |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly declares permanence (implying irreversibility) and requires an edit token, which signals authorization and helps predict that unauthorized deletions will fail. This covers key safety aspects, though error handling and side effects are not discussed.
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?
The description is a single sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the primary action ('Permanently delete') and immediately specifies the required identifiers, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.
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 simple delete operation with complete schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately covers the action, required inputs, and important context (permanence, token). No additional return-value explanation is needed. The information provided is sufficient for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.
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?
The input schema already provides 100% description coverage, fully explaining both 'id' as the URL path segment and 'edit_token' as the token from creation. The description merely restates these parameter names without adding new meaning, so the baseline score of 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?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('delete'), a resource ('share'), and a critical qualifier ('permanently'), making it easy to distinguish from siblings that create or update shares. The scope is unambiguous and leaves no doubt about the operation.
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?
Usage is implied: use when you need to permanently delete a share. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., 'instead of update_share') or mention any prerequisites beyond requiring the id and edit token. The guidance is functional but minimal.
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.
Each tool maps to a distinct action: sharing creates, update_share modifies, delete_share removes. No overlap in purpose, and the edit token requirement clearly separates operations.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: share_markdown, update_share, delete_share. The naming is uniform and predictable.
With only three tools, the server is tightly scoped to its purpose: sharing and managing markdown shares. Each tool is essential and the count is appropriate.
The tool set covers the full lifecycle of a share: create (share_markdown), update (update_share), and delete (delete_share). Reading is handled via the public URL, so no additional tool is needed.