Delete a Tailscale device invite to revoke access. The invite link becomes invalid immediately, preventing unused invites from granting device access.
Delete a device invite. This is irreversible — the invite link will stop working.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| inviteId | Yes | The device invite ID to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.13.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses beyond annotations by detailing the consequence ('invite link will stop working') and confirming irreversibility. No contradiction with annotations (destructiveHint: true).
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 efficient sentences: first states purpose, second adds behavioral consequence. No excess words.
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?
With one well-documented parameter, no output schema, and clear annotations, the description fully covers what an AI agent needs 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?
Input schema covers 100% of parameters with description for inviteId. Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
Description clearly states the verb 'Delete' and resource 'a device invite'. It distinguishes from sibling delete operations (e.g., delete_device, delete_webhook) by specifying the invite resource.
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?
Description mentions irreversibility and link deactivation, implying use when permanent removal is intended. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like 'resend_device_invite' or list contexts where deletion is not appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.