delete_treeDelete only a family tree definition while keeping shared people intact; undo restores the tree.
Delete only a tree definition. Shared people remain; undo restores the tree.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tree | Yes | Stable tree UUID (preferred) or exact name, as shown by list_trees. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark the tool as destructive. The description goes further by clarifying the exact behavior: only the tree definition is removed, shared people persist, and there is an 'undo' mechanism available to restore the tree. This is valuable behavioral context.
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 definition is extremely concise, consisting of two highly effective sentences that cover the definition, behavior, and safety profile of the deletion.
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?
The definition is complete for an MCP tool. It clarifies the resource being managed (definition vs. people), its irreversible nature (destructive hint), and the existence of a recovery path (undo), which is essential context for a deletion function.
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 100% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal semantic value. It does not clarify the syntax or logical constraints of the input 'tree' beyond what is already stated in the schema and annotations.
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 the specific verb 'Delete' and identifies the resource as 'a tree definition.' It distinguishes its scope by stating 'Shared people remain,' making it clear what the operation targets without needing to examine schemas.
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 by clarifying that it only removes the definition, suggesting that alternatives would be needed for more comprehensive deletions (like deleting users/people). However, it does not explicitly guide the user on which sibling tools to choose if they are attempting a different type of deletion.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.