delete_solution_categoryMove a solution category and all its folders and articles to the trash by specifying the category ID.
Move a category (and its folders and articles) to trash.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| category_id | Yes | Solution category ID |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds useful behavior: the category is soft-deleted to trash and its folders/articles move with it. It does not cover restore paths or permission requirements.
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?
One short sentence with zero waste, and the key cascade/trash behavior is front-loaded.
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 delete tool with an output schema and rich annotations, the description covers the essential behavior (trash + cascade). Minor gaps around restore and permissions keep it from being fully 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 required parameter is documented as "Solution category ID"; the description adds no extra parameter meaning, so the baseline is appropriate.
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 gives a specific action ("Move ... to trash"), the resource (category), and the scope (its folders and articles), which distinguishes it from deleting an individual folder or article.
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?
It does not state when to use this tool versus get/update/delete siblings, nor does it mention prerequisites or consequences beyond the trash/cascade note.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.