Permanently delete test cases by specifying ORM filters like ID or ID list, removing matching records from Kiwi TCMS.
Permanently delete test cases matching an ORM filter dict. DESTRUCTIVE. Pass e.g. {"id": 123} or {"id__in": [1,2,3]}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | ORM filter identifying the case(s) to remove |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden and handles it well: it explicitly labels the operation DESTRUCTIVE and permanently deletes, and shows that it can match and remove multiple cases via id__in. It does not mention cascading effects or return behavior, but the core irreversibility is clearly disclosed.
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?
Two sentences with no filler. The destructive nature is front-loaded, and the examples are placed exactly where they are needed. Every phrase 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 single-parameter destructive delete tool, the description covers the important operational details: what kind of filter to pass, that deletion is permanent, and that multiple matches can be removed. Return behavior is not described, but it is not necessary to invoke the tool correctly.
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 describes query as an ORM filter, but the description adds concrete examples ({"id": 123} and {"id__in": [1,2,3]}), clarifies it is a dict, and implicitly warns that multiple records may be affected. This goes well beyond the schema's basic description.
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 ('delete'), a specific resource ('test cases'), and the method of selection ('ORM filter dict'). It also clarifies the operation is permanent, making it unmistakable and distinct from sibling tools such as kiwi_delete_test_run or kiwi_update_test_case.
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 gives clear context: use this tool when test cases should be permanently removed, and the DESTRUCTIVE warning sets strong expectations. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use case is unambiguous for a delete operation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.