Asin MCP Server

Stop tracking a product

delete_product

Destructive

Stop tracking a product and remove it along with its stored price history by providing the product ID returned when it was added.

Instructions

Stop tracking a product. Removes the product and its price history.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_product"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	product_id returned when the product was added

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the blast radius — the associated price history is deleted too, not just the product record. It stops short of saying whether the deletion is irreversible or whether re-tracking restores history.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two short sentences with the destructive consequence front-loaded after the purpose statement. Nothing is wasted and nothing is buried.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter destructive tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema to explain, the definition is nearly complete. It could still note irreversibility or error behavior for an invalid id, but the essential information an agent needs to call it correctly is present.

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

Parameters3/5

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

With a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already explains that id is the product_id returned when the product was added. The description adds no additional meaning about the identifier or its expected format, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description gives a specific verb and resource ("Stop tracking a product") and clarifies the effect ("Removes the product and its price history"), which clearly separates it from siblings like track_product, get_product, and update_product. It does not explicitly name a sibling it could be confused with, but the destructive framing is unambiguous.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus update_product or list_products, and no stated prerequisites such as required permissions or a confirmation step. Usage is only implied by the phrase "stop tracking".

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

Deploy Server