Campos extras de cadastros: Deletar (DELETE /api/atributos_cadastros/{id}). [write, altera dados]
Bulk support: accepts ids for batched execution.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| ids | No | ||
| body | No | ||
| account | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description explicitly says 'Deletar' and 'DELETE', which are destructive operations, but annotations set destructiveHint=false, directly contradicting the described behavior. The 'write, altera dados' note and bulk support add some context, but the contradiction forces a score of 1.
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 compact and front-loaded: purpose, endpoint, write behavior, and bulk support are conveyed in two short lines with no wasted 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?
The description covers the core deletion action and batch capability, but there is no output schema and four parameters exist, of which 'body' and 'account' are unexplained. It also omits any note about irreversibility, prerequisites, or usage boundaries, leaving the tool incompletely specified.
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 0%, and the description only clarifies 'id' via the endpoint path and 'ids' via bulk support. The 'body' and 'account' parameters remain entirely unexplained, so the description only partially compensates for the lack of schema-level parameter documentation.
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 resource ('Campos extras de cadastros') and the action ('Deletar') with the exact HTTP DELETE endpoint. It is unambiguous and distinguishes this tool from the sibling create/get/list/update tools.
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 intended use is implied by 'Deletar' and the DELETE method, and bulk support is mentioned for batched execution. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or provide any 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.