delete_mcp_server

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the previous file is backed up, which is a valuable and non-obvious behavior. It does not mention potential error conditions, permission requirements, or other side effects, but the backup note adds useful transparency about reversibility.

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 sentence that efficiently states the action, resource, and backup behavior. It is front-loaded and contains no filler—every element is necessary.

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 simple deletion operation with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: what it removes and the backup note. It omits error handling or edge-case behavior, but those are likely covered by the output schema. Overall, it is adequately complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema covers the sole parameter 'name' with the description 'Server key to remove,' which is self-explanatory. The tool description echoes the removal concept but does not add extra detail about the parameter's format or constraints. With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no additional semantic value beyond the 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 action 'Remove' and the resource 'server entry from config/mcp.json', and it additionally notes the backup behavior. This makes its purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like upsert_mcp_server and replace_mcp_config, which handle add/update and whole-file replacement respectively.

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 explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the verb 'Remove' strongly implies its intended use for deletion, and the backup note suggests a safe removal. It does not discuss conditions that would favor other tools, but the intended use is evident from the name and action.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.