delete_widgetsDelete multiple widgets by ID in one call.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| widget_ids | Yes | Widget IDs to delete (from list_widgets). |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | No | Confirmation, and how many widgets were deleted. | |
| success | Yes | True when the call succeeded. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Input schema / properties / idsRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Array of widget IDs to delete (from list_widgets).",
- "items": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "type": "array"
-}Input schema / properties / widget_idsAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Widget IDs to delete (from list_widgets).",
+ "items": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "ids"
-]New value: +[
+ "widget_ids"
+]Output schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Output schema / properties / success / descriptionPrevious value: -"True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead."New value: +"True when the call succeeded."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 covered. The description adds the behavioral detail of 'in one call', indicating a batched operation, but does not disclose potential partial failures, irreversibility, or permission requirements. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description adds minimal but useful extra context.
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 that front-loads the action and scope. It is efficient with no fluff, placing the key distinguishing information ('multiple', 'in one call') prominently.
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 tool with one array parameter, an existing output schema, and annotations covering destructive behavior, the description is adequately complete. It clearly states the operation and relies on the schema for parameter details. It might benefit from mentioning non-existent IDs handling, but that is minor given the output schema and annotations.
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 description coverage is 100% for the widget_ids parameter, including the note 'from list_widgets'. The description's 'by ID' is redundant with the schema. No additional parameter meaning is added beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 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 states a specific verb ('Delete'), resource ('widgets'), and distinguishes the plural form by explicitly saying 'multiple widgets by ID in one call'. This clearly separates it from the singular delete_widget sibling and other delete operations.
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?
The description conveys the intended use case (batch deletion of multiple widgets) without explicitly naming alternatives or exclusions. The existence of delete_widget implies a singular alternative, but the description doesn't explicitly say when to prefer one over the other. It provides clear context but lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance.
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.