zephyr-squad-server-mcp

delete_test_step

Need to remove a test step? Delete it and view the remaining steps for the issue.

Instructions

Delete a test step. Returns the remaining steps for the issue.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "issue": "<issue>",
      "step_id": "<step_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_test_step"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`issue`	Yes
`step_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 24, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool deletes a step and returns remaining steps, which is useful. However, it omits behavioral details like irreversibility, permission requirements, or side effects on related objects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise with two sentences, no redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating purpose and output).

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple delete tool, the description provides a basic understanding of purpose and return value. However, it lacks parameter details and usage context, which are needed given no output schema and minimal annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, and the description adds no explanation for parameters. It does not clarify what 'issue' refers to (key, ID?) or the expected format of 'step_id'. The schema provides titles but no descriptions, and the description fails to compensate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('a test step'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like create_test_step, update_test_step, and other delete tools. Also mentions that it returns remaining steps, providing additional clarity on the outcome.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., delete_cycle, delete_execution). It does not specify prerequisites, such as requiring issue and step_id to exist, or when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.