Delete an existing NRQL alert condition by ID to stop unwanted alerting and simplify rule management.
Delete a NRQL alert condition by ID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| condition_id | Yes | ID of the condition 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 carries the full burden. It only states the core delete action and omits behavioral context such as irreversibility, required permissions, behavior when the condition does not exist, or side effects on related resources.
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?
The description is a single, compact sentence with the verb and object front-loaded. There is no filler, redundancy, or unnecessary information.
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 low-complexity tool with one required parameter and 100% schema coverage, the description provides enough information to invoke the tool correctly. The absence of an output schema and behavioral caveats is minor for such a simple delete operation.
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 covers the single parameter condition_id completely, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'by ID' is consistent with the schema but does not add semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides.
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 ('NRQL alert condition'), and the method ('by ID'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like delete_alert_policy and aligns with create_nrql_condition/update_nrql_condition.
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 clearly conveys when to use the tool: to delete a NRQL alert condition by its ID. It does not explicitly discuss alternatives or exclusions, but the resource is specific enough that usage context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.