Remove a Trello checklist permanently by specifying its checklist ID. This action irreversibly deletes the checklist, helping you clean up your board.
⚠️ SUPPRIME DÉFINITIVEMENT une checklist (irréversible)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| checklistId | Yes | Parameter checklistId (24 characters) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and it clearly discloses the destructive, permanent nature of the operation ('SUPPRIME DÉFINITIVEMENT', 'irréversible'). It does not detail side effects like whether checklist items are also removed, but the key behavioral trait of irreversibility is prominently exposed.
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 one compact sentence with no filler; the warning emoji and parenthetical irreversibility note add meaningful emphasis without bloat. It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter destructive tool.
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 destructive operation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description conveys the action, target, and irreversibility clearly. It does not mention how to obtain the checklistId or what the response looks like, but these are minor gaps for a simple delete operation.
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 100% coverage for the single parameter, including a note about the 24-character format. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
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 verb ('SUPPRIME DÉFINITIVEMENT' = permanently deletes) and a specific resource ('une checklist'), making the tool's function unmistakable. It also distinguishes itself from sibling delete tools by naming the checklist resource explicitly.
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 implies usage through the resource type—if you need to delete a checklist, this is the tool—but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion conditions. No guidance is given on when not to use it or when to prefer a sibling delete tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.