Delete a payment policy by its ID from eBay. Remove outdated policies to keep your selling account accurate and compliant.
Delete a payment policy
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| paymentPolicyId | Yes | The payment policy ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.8.10Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds no extra behavioral context such as irreversibility, constraints on deleting a policy in use, or side effects. It simply restates the operation.
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?
One short, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It is appropriately sized for a simple single-parameter operation.
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 CRUD delete with destructive annotations and one documented parameter, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it omits usage context and consequences, so an agent gets no guidance on prerequisites or side effects.
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% (the lone paymentPolicyId parameter is described). The description does not add further parameter meaning, but the schema already covers it, so baseline 3 applies.
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') and resource ('payment policy'), which clearly identifies the operation and differentiates it from sibling payment-policy tools like create/get/update. The action is unambiguous even without naming alternatives.
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 delete a payment policy, what prerequisites exist, or which alternative to choose. The description provides no context beyond the operation itself.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.