Delete multiple LacyLights cues in one operation. Requires confirmation and returns the number successfully deleted plus any failed cue IDs.
Delete multiple cues in a single operation. Returns count of successfully deleted cues and any failed IDs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cueIds | Yes | Array of cue IDs to delete | |
| confirmDelete | Yes | Confirm deletion (required to be true for safety) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.7.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state the return format (count of successful deletions and failed IDs), but it does not disclose that deletion is destructive, whether it is reversible, or whether undo is available—critical omissions for a delete operation.
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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and no wasted words. The return-value note is secondary but directly relevant.
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?
The description covers the action and return summary, and the schema fully documents parameters. However, for a destructive bulk tool with no annotations and no output schema, it should provide more safety context (e.g., irreversibility, confirmation requirement beyond the schema) and guidance on alternatives.
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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents both parameters ('cueIds' and 'confirmDelete') clearly. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline 3 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 states a specific verb ('Delete'), resource ('cues'), and scope ('multiple cues in a single operation'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling bulk-delete tools that target other resources like projects, looks, or cue lists.
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 phrase 'multiple cues in a single operation' implies this is for bulk deletion, which is useful context. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus a single-cue deletion alternative, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.