pool_delete
Delete a resource pool by specifying its pool ID.
Instructions
Delete a resource pool.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pool_id | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Delete a resource pool by specifying its pool ID.
Delete a resource pool.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pool_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states deletion but omits irreversible effects, prerequisites (e.g., whether pool must be empty), or error conditions.
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 short sentence, which is concise but under-specified. It is not verbose, but it sacrifices informativeness for brevity.
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 simple structure (1 required param) and presence of output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to mention return values or side effects, though the tool is straightforward.
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%. The description does not explain the meaning of 'pool_id' or how to obtain it, leaving the agent with no additional semantic value.
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 specifies the verb 'Delete' and the resource 'resource pool', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like pool_create, pool_get, etc.
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 on when to use this tool or when to consider alternatives (e.g., pool_resource_remove). The description provides no context for usage decisions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Olaw2jr/gns3-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server