Delete a specific API by providing its API ID.
Delete an API
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": {
"apiId": "<apiId>"
},
"name": "delete_api"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| apiId | Yes | API ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description implies a destructive action but provides no details about side effects, required permissions, or whether deletion is permanent. With no annotations, the description must cover these aspects but fails to do so.
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?
The description is extremely concise (2 words), but for a simple delete tool with one parameter, it is not wasteful. However, it lacks structure such as separate sections or examples.
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?
The low-complexity tool has no output schema, and the description does not explain the return behavior (e.g., confirmation message or deleted object). The description is incomplete for an agent to fully anticipate the tool's effect.
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?
The schema provides 100% coverage for the single parameter (apiId) with a description 'API ID'. The description adds no further meaning, but the schema is sufficient. Baseline 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 clearly states 'Delete an API', specifying the verb (delete) and resource (API). Among sibling tools with various delete operations (e.g., delete_api_comment, delete_api_version), this uniquely identifies deleting the main API resource.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_api_version or delete_collection. There is no mention of prerequisites or cautions (e.g., irreversibility).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.