Deletes an Event Broker subscription by ID, enabling authorized users to remove obsolete subscription configurations.
Delete Subscription Delete Subscription. Only Solution users and system admin (e.g. for vRO) can manage subscriptions. DELETE /event-broker/api/subscriptions/{id}
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | the id of Subscription (path) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the core safety profile is known. The description adds useful authorization context, but it does not explain permanence, cascading effects, or what a successful deletion returns beyond the endpoint.
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 short and front-loaded, but it repeats 'Delete Subscription' twice and restates the endpoint already present in the annotation title. Those repetitions do not add information, though the remaining content is not bloated.
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, single-parameter delete operation, the schema and annotations carry most of the burden, and the description supplies the key missing authorization prerequisite. It does not describe post-deletion effects or response behavior, but with destructiveHint and the full parameter schema present, an agent has enough information to invoke it correctly.
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 100% and the single `id` parameter is documented as the subscription id path parameter. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Delete Subscription', and includes the REST endpoint, so the intended operation is clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling read tools such as eventbroker_get_subscription, but the delete verb and resource make the core purpose easy to identify.
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 states an important prerequisite: only Solution users and system admin can manage subscriptions. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or related operations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.