Delete an email alias in ISPConfig by specifying the alias ID. Removes the alias to stop email forwarding or delivery to that address.
Delete a mail alias
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| alias_id | Yes | Alias ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. 'Delete' indicates the destructive nature, but the description does not mention whether deletion is permanent, whether it affects email routing or forwarding rules, or what error behavior to expect.
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, focused sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it appropriately concise for a simple delete operation.
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?
Given the low complexity of a one-parameter delete operation, the description plus schema provide enough information to invoke the tool correctly. Missing behavioral details are notable but do not prevent correct usage in a straightforward context.
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 fully documents the single parameter with a clear description ('Alias ID'), so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline of 3.
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 'Delete a mail alias' uses a specific verb and resource, making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like mail_alias_add and mail_forward_delete without ambiguity.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of what happens if the alias does not exist. The description is not misleading, but it provides no usage context beyond the action itself.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.