Remove an entire Kanbn board directory by specifying its path, clearing project data and freeing workspace space.
Delete an entire Kanbn board directory.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | Path to the board directory to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral transparency burden. It clearly indicates destructive scope by saying 'entire ... directory,' but it does not mention irreversibility, side effects on associated files/tasks, or error behavior when the path does not exist.
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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It directly communicates the action and the target resource.
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 one-parameter tool, the description plus schema are adequate for basic invocation. However, because this is a destructive operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description omits useful context about expected return behavior, irreversibility, and failure conditions.
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 already documents the only parameter, path, with 100% coverage and a clear description. The tool description adds no new parameter semantics beyond restating that the path refers to a board directory, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
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 an entire Kanbn board directory.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like kanbn_delete_board_file and kanbn_delete_task by emphasizing the whole directory, not a file or task.
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 phrase 'entire Kanbn board directory' implies the tool is for whole-board deletion, but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over alternatives such as kanbn_delete_board_file or kanbn_delete_task, and no exclusions are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.