Deletes a product SKU from SyncroMSP only after explicit confirmation; requires product ID, SKU ID, and confirmed=true.
DELETE a product SKU. The user MUST confirm.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | SKU ID | |
| confirmed | Yes | Must be true | |
| product_id | Yes | Product ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.10.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that the operation is a DELETE and that user confirmation is required, but it omits important details such as irreversibility, permissions, or side effects on related data.
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 short sentences with no wasted words. The destructive action is front-loaded, and the confirmation requirement follows immediately.
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 deletion tool with full schema coverage, the description covers the core action and confirmation requirement. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it should ideally say more about irreversibility or expected behavior after deletion.
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%, so all parameters are already documented. The description adds marginal value by emphasizing that the user must confirm the action, but it does not add syntax or format details beyond what the schema 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) and resource (product SKU), making the operation unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings such as products_update_sku and products_create_sku.
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 only says the user MUST confirm, which is a procedural constraint rather than guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It provides no context about when deletion is appropriate or when a different tool should be used.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.