delete_configuration

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses up-front validations (existence, not active, not only), notes reversibility (configs are pure metadata, no broken geometry), and specifies return value. Lacks mention of permissions or error handling, but covers key behavioral traits.

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?

Well-structured with purpose first, then scope, validations, and use case. Slightly verbose due to bilingual content, but each sentence adds value. Front-loaded key 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?

Comprehensive coverage for a deletion tool: explains preconditions, edge cases (active/only config), return value, and typical use cases. No output schema, but return value is described. Sibling reference enhances context.

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?

Input schema has one required string 'name' with 0% field description coverage. Description adds 'The configuration to delete' which clarifies purpose but is minimal. For a simple single-parameter tool, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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?

Clearly specifies that the tool deletes a configuration from the active document. Distinguishes itself as the only deletion tool in v1 MCP, explicitly contrasting with component/feature deletion which is not exposed.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (cleanup of obsolete trim variants, removing test/scratch configurations) and when not to use (not for components/features). Provides prerequisites (not active, not only configuration) and references sibling tool activate_configuration for switching active config.

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