Remove a subcontract line item from a canned service template using the service ID and item ID to update the template's parts.
Remove a subcontract line item from a canned service template.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| itemId | Yes | The subcontract line item ID to remove | |
| cannedServiceId | Yes | The canned service ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the operation without any details on side effects, idempotency, error handling, or whether the deletion is permanent. This is minimal transparency.
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, concise sentence that directly communicates the tool's purpose without unnecessary words or repetition.
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 tool is simple, with no output schema. The description sufficiently explains the action, though it could benefit from noting whether the operation is idempotent or what happens if the subcontract item does not exist. Overall, the context is adequately covered for an agent to use 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 schema already provides descriptions for both parameters, so coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning about how the parameters relate or any constraints, keeping it at the baseline score.
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 action (remove) and the specific resource (subcontract line item from a canned service template), distinguishing it from other removal tools like remove_canned_service_fee or remove_canned_service_part.
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 usage is implied by the action description rather than explicitly stated. It does not mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor does it provide any exclusions or conditions. However, the purpose is specific enough that an agent could infer when to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.