Remove multiple items from a Slack list in a single API call. Specify the list ID and item IDs to delete them together.
Delete multiple items from a Slack List in one call. Requires lists:write scope.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| list_id | Yes | List ID | |
| item_ids | Yes | List of item IDs to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.8Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose an important auth requirement ('Requires lists:write scope'), which is valuable beyond the schema. However, it does not mention potential partial failure, irreversibility, or what happens if some item IDs are invalid.
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 sentence with no filler, action and resource front-loaded, and the scope requirement neatly appended. Every word earns its place.
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 simple two-parameter delete operation with a fully described schema, the description captures the resource, the batch behavior, and the required scope. The absence of an output schema is acceptable here because a successful delete response is generally predictable, though explicit mention of return value or partial-failure behavior would make it 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%, so both parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 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?
Description states a specific verb ('Delete'), a specific resource ('items from a Slack List'), and a key distinguishing trait ('multiple items... in one call'). This clearly differentiates it from the sibling tool delete_list_item, which handles single-item deletion.
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 items... in one call' implies the batch-use case and suggests a contrast with the singular delete_list_item tool, but it never explicitly names the alternative or states when to prefer one over the other. Usage context is clear but left to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.