Delete a New Relic dashboard by its GUID to remove unwanted or outdated dashboards.
Delete a dashboard by GUID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dashboard_guid | Yes | GUID of the dashboard to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Delete' without mentioning that deletion is irreversible, may require permissions, or could affect associated widgets. For a destructive tool, this is a significant transparency gap.
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?
Single sentence with no filler; the action and identifier type are front-loaded. Every word earns its place for a one-parameter delete tool.
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?
Although the schema fully covers the single parameter, the absence of annotations and output schema puts the burden on the description. It does not explain destructive consequences, permanence, or effects on dependent objects like widgets, so the agent lacks safety-relevant context needed for confident invocation.
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 coverage is 100%: dashboard_guid is fully documented in the input schema and marked as required. The description merely repeats 'GUID' without adding format, source, or validation details, so it adds little beyond the schema.
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 uses a specific verb 'Delete' and a clear resource 'dashboard' with an identifier type 'GUID'. This unambiguously distinguishes the tool from sibling delete_* tools and from dashboard read/create tools.
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?
Usage is implied by the verb and resource: it is the tool to call when removing a dashboard. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no prerequisites or side conditions such as dashboard existence or dependencies.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.