delete_pagePermanently delete one of your pages by slug. The link stops working immediately and the slug is freed. Deleting an already-deleted page is a safe no-op.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ok | Yes | ||
| slug | Yes | ||
| alreadyDeleted | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds significant behavioral details beyond the annotations: 'permanently delete', 'link stops working immediately', 'slug is freed', and 'safe no-op' for already-deleted pages. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description reinforces and expands on these.
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 two sentences with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the primary action and includes all necessary details in a compact form.
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 low-complexity tool with one parameter, annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the deletion action, immediate effects, and idempotency, providing all information needed for an agent to use it 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 only parameter, slug, is described in the schema with min/max length. The description mentions 'by slug' but does not add further semantic meaning or formatting guidance. With schema coverage at 0%, the description should compensate, but it only minimally connects the slug to the page.
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 verb (delete), resource (page), and the identifier (slug). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_page, update_page, etc., by specifying that the action is permanent deletion.
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 provides context on when to use the tool (to delete a page by slug) and explains the effects: link stops working, slug is freed, and idempotency. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, so it's slightly lacking in exclusionary 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.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: delete, get account, get page metadata, list pages, publish new, update existing. No overlap or ambiguity.
All names follow a lowercase snake_case verb_noun pattern (delete_page, get_account, get_page, list_my_pages, update_page) with only 'publish' being a single verb but still clear and consistent with the pattern.
6 tools cover the core operations of a page hosting service (CRUD, list, account info) without being too many or too few. The scope is well-scoped.
The tool set covers CRUD and listing, but notably get_page does not return the page body, so agents cannot retrieve published content via API. Missing tools like 'search pages' or account management, but the core workflow is largely complete.