delete_allClear the design by removing all timeline items in Fusion 360. Use to reset a model to a blank state.
Clear the design (delete all timeline items)
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "delete_all"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds value by clarifying the scope ('all timeline items') and the action ('Clear'), which aligns with annotations and provides context on what gets destroyed. No contradiction exists.
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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Clear the design') and specifies the target ('delete all timeline items') without any redundant information. Every word serves a purpose.
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?
Given the tool's destructive nature, annotations cover safety (destructiveHint=true), and the description adds scope. However, with no output schema, it lacks details on return values or confirmation messages, leaving a minor gap in completeness for such a high-impact operation.
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?
With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4. The description confirms no inputs are needed by specifying the action applies to 'all timeline items', adding clarity beyond the empty schema.
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 the verb ('Clear'/'delete') and resource ('design'/'timeline items'), specifying the scope as 'all timeline items'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'delete_parameter' by targeting the entire design rather than a specific parameter.
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?
The description implies usage when clearing all timeline items is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'delete_parameter' for specific deletions) or provide exclusions. It offers basic context without detailed guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.