redreplier

Delete Keyword

delete_keyword

Destructive

Permanently delete an unwanted PENDING keyword with no billing effect and no undo. Use this to prevent activation charges; other statuses require different tools.

Instructions

Permanently delete one keyword. Only PENDING keywords qualify (never billed, never live), so there is no billing effect and no undo. Any other status returns 400 "Only pending keywords can be removed": use disable_keyword for an ACTIVE keyword, edit_keyword to fix a SUSPENDED one, and delete_website to drop a whole site. Prefer this over leaving unwanted PENDING keywords in place, because activate_pending_keywords would otherwise try to pay for them. Returns { deleted: true }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`keywordId`	Yes	Keyword ID (UUID)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	No	{ deleted: true } once the PENDING keyword is removed.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.1Sep 7, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / result / description

Previous value: -"Confirmation that the keyword was deleted."New value: +"{ deleted: true } once the PENDING keyword is removed."

First observedv0.1.0Sep 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description adds key behavioral details: no billing effect, no undo, and the return value. This gives the agent a full picture of consequences.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is longer than a typical one-liner but each sentence adds necessary information (conditions, alternatives, consequences, return). It is well-organized and not redundant, though slightly verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description fully covers when to use it, what happens, and what to expect in return. No critical information is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The only parameter (keywordId) is fully described in the schema as 'Keyword ID (UUID)'. The description adds no extra semantic detail, but schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states the action (permanently delete) and resource (one keyword), and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying when to use them (disable_keyword for ACTIVE, edit_keyword for SUSPENDED, delete_website for whole site).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit conditions for use (only PENDING keywords) and names specific alternatives for other statuses, leaving no ambiguity about when this tool should be selected.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.