delete_uploaded_documentDelete an uploaded document before its 24h TTL. Deleting a missing/already-expired/foreign id returns deleted:false rather than an error.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| upload_id | Yes | The upload_id returned by POST /v1/uploads. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| _meta | Yes | Provenance envelope — data lineage for every MCP response | |
| deleted | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / properties / _meta / properties / fundamentals_as_of / descriptionPrevious value: -"ISO timestamp when the FINANCIAL STATEMENTS were last rebuilt. Use THIS — not `last_updated` — when telling a user how current the fundamentals are. The snapshot is republished on every weekday price refresh while the statements are carried forward unchanged, so `last_updated` can be far more recent than the numbers it sits next to."New value: +"ISO timestamp when the FINANCIAL STATEMENTS were last rebuilt in bulk. Use THIS — not `last_updated` — when telling a user how current the cross-sectional fundamentals are. The snapshot is republished on every weekday price refresh while the statements are carried forward unchanged, so `last_updated` can be far more recent than the numbers it sits next to. It is a floor for a single filer, not a ceiling: a filer with a live partition receives its filing, facts and ratios intraday (minutes after EDGAR dissemination), so an entity-scoped read may carry a filing newer than this; cross-sectional ranks (factor scores, earnings signals) refresh with the weekly bulk export."Output schema / properties / _meta / properties / fundamentals_as_ofAdded value: +{
+ "description": "ISO timestamp when the FINANCIAL STATEMENTS were last rebuilt. Use THIS — not `last_updated` — when telling a user how current the fundamentals are. The snapshot is republished on every weekday price refresh while the statements are carried forward unchanged, so `last_updated` can be far more recent than the numbers it sits next to.",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / _meta / properties / price_as_ofAdded value: +{
+ "description": "ISO timestamp when the price surfaces were last refreshed.",
+ "type": "string"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true), the description discloses the 24h TTL and that deleting missing/expired/foreign IDs returns deleted:false instead of raising an error. This is valuable behavioral context that annotations alone do not provide.
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?
Two concise sentences with no filler. The primary behavior is front-loaded, and the edge-case handling follows immediately. Every sentence contributes useful information.
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 single-parameter destructive idempotent tool with an output schema, annotations, and full schema coverage, the description provides all necessary behavioral guidance. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke the 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 single parameter upload_id is already fully described in the schema (returned by POST /v1/uploads), and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds contextual terms like TTL and foreign id but does not add new parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema.
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 action (delete) and resource (uploaded document), and adds a unique scope constraint ('before its 24h TTL') that distinguishes it from other delete_* siblings. An agent can determine what this tool does immediately.
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 clearly conveys when to use the tool (to delete an uploaded document before its TTL expires) and explains the behavior for edge cases. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the sibling context makes the intended use unambiguous.
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.