Delete a step from a Microsoft To Do task by providing the list, task ID, and step ID to remove unwanted checklist items.
Delete a step from a task.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| list | Yes | List display name (case-insensitive) or list id | |
| step_id | Yes | Step id from get_task | |
| task_id | Yes | Task id from list_tasks |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already disclose destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description does not need to restate that this is destructive. It adds minimal context ('from a task') but does not describe consequences such as permanence or effects on the task's step list.
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 that front-loads the action and contains no filler or redundant restatement. Every word earns its place.
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 simple delete operation, the required parameters are fully documented in the schema and the safety profile is covered by annotations. The description is mostly sufficient, though it does not mention return behavior or permanence beyond what the annotations imply.
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 100%, so all three required parameters are already documented. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the general statement that a step is deleted from a task.
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 names the resource ('a step') and its container ('a task'), making the operation unambiguous. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like delete_task or update_step.
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 the tool should be used when a step needs to be removed, but it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives. Usage context is adequate but left to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.