delete_households_cookbooks_by_itemDelete a specific household cookbook by providing its item ID. Removes unwanted cookbooks from a household to keep recipe collections organized.
Delete One
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| item_id | Yes | ||
| accept-language | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.20.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention that deletion is destructive, whether it cascades, requires permissions, or is reversible. 'Delete One' conveys only the action itself, with no useful behavioral context.
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 short, but this is under-specification rather than genuine conciseness. A good concise description would still identify the resource and the effect. 'Delete One' does not earn its place because it adds no information beyond the tool name.
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?
Even for a simple delete operation, the description fails to name what is being deleted, what item_id refers to, or what the API expects. With no annotations and no explanatory text, an agent cannot confidently determine the correct call, especially among numerous similar delete tools.
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%, so the description needs to explain the parameters. It does not mention item_id at all, leaving the agent to guess what the required identifier refers to. The optional accept-language parameter is also completely unaddressed.
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 'Delete One' provides only a verb and a singular quantity, but never names the resource being deleted. It restates what the tool name already implies without clarifying that it deletes a household cookbook. This is a tautological description rather than a clear statement of purpose.
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 given for when to use this tool versus any alternative. The many sibling delete_*_by_item tools are not addressed, and there is no mention of prerequisites, excluded cases, or preferred alternatives. The description provides no decision-making help.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.