Permanently delete an Onshape document by ID to clean up throwaway test or iteration docs created by an agent. Returns status and document ID.
Move an Onshape document to the trash. Irreversible via the API; intended for cleanup of throwaway docs created by an agent (test/iteration runs). Returns {ok, status, document_id}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| documentId | Yes | Document ID to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description clearly warns that deletion is irreversible and indicates it returns a status object. Without annotations, it still conveys the destructive nature and basic side effect, though it does not mention permission requirements or cascading effects.
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 two concise sentences with no redundant wording. It packs the action, intent, irreversibility, and return value efficiently.
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 low-complexity delete operation, the description fully covers what the tool does, why it is used, its irreversibility, and the return shape. No output schema is provided, but the description supplies the essential return fields.
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 parameter documentId is described in both the schema and description as the ID of the document to delete, so the description adds little beyond the schema. No extra detail is provided about the expected format, source, or required ownership.
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 states the tool moves an Onshape document to the trash, distinct from deleting features or other entity-specific operations. The cleanup intent also differentiates it from document creation and search tools.
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 says it is intended for cleanup of throwaway documents created by an agent, giving a clear usage context. It does not explicitly mention alternative tools, but the cleanup intent is enough to guide selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.