Zen Money MCP

delete_category

Permanently remove an unused category after explicit confirmation, helping prevent accidental deletion.

Instructions

Безвозвратно удалить неиспользуемую категорию после явного подтверждения.

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>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "delete_category"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`confirm`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the two traits that matter most for a destructive call: the effect is permanent/irreversible ('Безвозвратно') and a confirmation step is mandatory. It still omits what error occurs when the category is referenced by transactions, whether subcategories are affected, and whether permissions are required.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, and the most consequential fact (irreversibility) is front-loaded ahead of the preconditions.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a destructive two-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core risk and the confirmation gate, which is the essential minimum. It is still thin on consequences: no mention of what failure looks like when the category is in use, and no description of any return value confirming the deletion.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. 'После явного подтверждения' maps clearly onto the boolean const `confirm` parameter, but the `id` parameter is never mentioned — the agent gets no confirmation that `id` is the category identifier nor what form it takes.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (delete a category) plus two scoping qualifiers: irreversible and unused-only. An agent can tell this apart from a generic removal, though it never names the near-siblings hide_category or update_category, so the boundary is learned only by inference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The prerequisite condition is present ('неиспользуемую' = unused, 'после явного подтверждения' = after explicit confirmation), which is more than most delete tools offer. But there is no explicit routing advice versus hide_category or archive-style alternatives, and no stated behavior when the category is in use, leaving the when-not case implicit.

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