vcf-ops-mpb-mcp

Delete designs

mpb_delete_designs

Destructive

Deletes MPB designs by ID without removing installed management packs; set confirm to true to execute the destructive deletion.

Instructions

Deletes MPB designs (not installed management packs). Requires confirm: true.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "designIds": "<designIds>"
    },
    "name": "mpb_delete_designs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`confirm`	No	Must be true to actually perform this destructive change
`designIds`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is supplied. The description adds real value on top by stating the confirm:true requirement, which is a prerequisite behavior not implied by the hints, though it says nothing about permanence 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single compact sentence with the destructive-action precondition front-loaded after the core verb. Nothing is wasted and nothing important is buried.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter destructive tool whose annotations already cover safety, the description supplies the key gate (confirm) and scope disambiguation. Minor gaps remain on whether deletion is reversible and what interactive side effects the deleted designs' members incur.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 50%: confirm is already documented in the schema with the same meaning the description restates. designIds carries no description in either place, so the agent gets no added detail on identifier format or cardinality beyond the schema's minItems.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Deletes MPB designs') and adds a scoping distinction ('not installed management packs') that separates it from install-related siblings. It does not name a specific alternative deletion tool, so it stops short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The parenthetical clarifies what kind of objects this deletes, which implicitly routes the agent away from installed management pack removal. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance relative to siblings such as mpb_delete_items or mpb_install.

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