Removes a Patreon post through the web editor API by supplying its post ID. Use this destructive action only when content must be deleted, as it cannot be undone.
Delete a post through Patreon's web editor API.
This is destructive and cannot be undone.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| post_id | Yes | Patreon post ID. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| deleted | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description's 'destructive and cannot be undone' restates destructiveHint, though naming the web editor API endpoint adds minor context. No further behavioral detail (permissions, effect on published vs draft posts) is disclosed.
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, both front-loaded on the action, with the destructive warning immediately following. Nothing extraneous and no repetition of the title.
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 single-parameter mutation with an output schema present (so no return-value explanation needed) and annotations covering the safety profile, the description is nearly sufficient. It could still note whether published posts or only drafts are deletable, but the core is complete.
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% and the single post_id parameter is documented in the schema as 'Patreon post ID.' The description adds no extra meaning beyond that, so the 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?
States a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a post'), and the 'web editor API' qualifier pins down which API surface. Among the siblings, it is unambiguously the deletion counterpart to create_post/update_post/publish_post.
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 when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are given. The warning that the action is irreversible is a caution, not routing guidance for choosing this tool over update_post or equivalent siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.