Delete an absence record from Oracle HCM by its absence ID. Use this tool to remove incorrect or outdated absence entries, with write approval required unless the --write flag is used.
Delete an absence (approval unless --write).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| absenceId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds a cryptic 'approval unless --write' note but fails to explain what --write does, how the approval process works, or the consequences of deletion. This adds confusion rather than clarity.
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 very short, but the parenthetical structure is poorly formed and ambiguous. It is not verbose, but the lack of clear sentence structure and the cryptic note make it less effective than a straightforward single clause.
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 destructive tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the approval flow, the meaning of --write, success/failure behavior, or how it relates to other tools like hcm_get_absence or hcm_approve_write. An agent would be uncertain about the actual effects and required steps.
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 provides no explanation of absenceId. It does not specify the format, how to obtain a valid ID, or any validation requirements. With zero coverage, the description should have compensated but did not.
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 clear action ('Delete an absence'), but the parenthetical '(approval unless --write)' introduces ambiguity about whether the tool deletes directly or via an approval workflow. This muddles the primary purpose and does not clearly distinguish it from hcm_approve_write or hcm_update_absence.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like hcm_update_absence or hcm_approve_write. The description does not mention any prerequisites, conditions for direct deletion vs approval, or when the --write flag should be used.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.