delete_change_orderPermanently deletes a change order and its items. Cannot be undone—use update with denied status to retain the record.
Deletes a change order or change order request for good.
Deletes the change order and its items. It cannot be undone. To keep the record, use update_change_order with status denied instead.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| change_order_id | Yes | From list_change_orders. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the basic safety profile is covered. The description adds important behavioral detail by stating that associated items are also deleted and that the deletion is permanent, though it does not mention permissions or confirmation requirements.
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?
Three short sentences with no wasted text. The irreversible consequence is front-loaded, followed by cascade behavior and the safer alternative.
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 destructive delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential decision context: permanence, cascade deletion, and the recommended alternative. The parameter source is already covered by the schema.
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 single parameter is documented in the schema as coming from list_change_orders. The description does not add meaning beyond that, so the baseline score of 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 and resource: deleting a change order or change order request, including its items. It clearly distinguishes deletion from the sibling alternative update_change_order.
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?
It explicitly says the action cannot be undone and names the exact alternative for preserving the record: update_change_order with status denied. This gives the agent a clear when-to-use versus when-not-to-use rule.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.