delete_caption_templateDeletes a saved caption template by its template_id, allowing you to remove obsolete or unwanted templates from your workspace.
Delete a user-saved caption template by id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| template_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the delete semantics are covered structurally. The description adds the useful qualifier that only user-saved templates are eligible (built-ins presumably can't be removed), but says nothing about irreversibility, permission requirements, or behavior when the id is invalid or unknown.
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 the verb and the resource front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing could be cut without losing information.
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 one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema and no annotation details beyond destructiveness, the definition is serviceable but thin. An agent still lacks error behavior, id format expectations, and any post-deletion confirmation semantics.
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 0% for the single parameter, so the description carries some burden. Saying "by id" clarifies that template_id is an identifier rather than a name, but no format (UUID, slug, opaque string) or example is provided to help construct a valid call.
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 and resource ("Delete a user-saved caption template") and narrows scope to user-saved templates via "by id". The resource name is distinct from siblings such as delete_brand_kit, delete_asset, and delete_project, though it never explicitly contrasts with apply_caption_template or list_caption_templates.
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?
"User-saved" hints that only templates created via save_caption_template qualify, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of apply_caption_template as the non-destructive alternative, and no note about what to do if the template is missing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.