Delete a segment by its ID to remove it from your audience management. Use this action when you need to clean up or eliminate unwanted segments.
Delete a segment (DELETE /segments/:id).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The segment id. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Delete' signals destructiveness, but the description does not disclose irreversibility, whether contacts or segment memberships are affected, required permissions, or any side effects. This is a meaningful gap for a mutating tool.
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 with the action and endpoint front-loaded. There is no filler, repetition of schema details, or unnecessary context.
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 one-parameter delete, this is minimally viable, but without annotations or an output schema it omits side effects, error/status behavior, and what a successful deletion returns. An agent would still have open questions about impact and confirmation.
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 documents the only parameter (id) with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to restate it. The HTTP endpoint adds the minor detail that id is a path parameter, but otherwise adds no significant semantic value 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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('segment') plus the HTTP endpoint, making the operation unambiguous. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling segment tools like create_segment, get_segment, update_segment, and list_segments.
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 correct usage is implied by the verb and resource, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or mention of alternatives/exclusions. For a straightforward delete, this is adequate but not actively instructive.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.