Delete a specific X post by providing its post ID. Optionally specify the owning account to remove the correct post.
Delete a post owned by the given account (billed per request).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account | No | X username of an authorized account (see list_accounts). Omit to use the default account. | |
| post_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the bar is lower. The description still adds genuinely non-annotated context: the operation is billed per request and is scoped to a post the given account owns, which matters for retry/cost decisions and for pre-call authorization.
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?
A single 13-word sentence with the action front-loaded and the two addenda (ownership, billing) appended compactly. No filler, nothing to trim.
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 one-required-parameter destructive call whose annotations already carry the safety semantics and which has no output schema, the description covers purpose, cost, and ownership scoping. Remaining gaps (permanence/irreversibility, error cases) are minor given the annotation coverage.
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 50%: 'account' is well documented in the schema (references list_accounts and the default-account behavior) while 'post_id' has no description at all. The description only implies a constraint — that post_id must reference a post owned by the account — without clarifying identifier format or failure behavior, so it neither compensates nor falls below the baseline.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a post') with an ownership scope ('owned by the given account'), which is unambiguous. It does not, however, differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as post_action or create_post, so the agent gets no explicit routing cue.
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?
There is no when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative tool is named. The agent must infer that post_action or other post-mutating siblings are not the right choice for deletion.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.