transkribus_coll_credit_remove_packageRemove a credit package from a collection by supplying the collection ID and package ID. This tool deletes the package association, helping manage credit usage.
Remove a credit package from a collection.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Credit package ID to remove | |
| collId | Yes | Collection ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as side effects, authorization needs, or what happens if the package doesn't exist. It is consistent with annotations, so no contradiction, but does not enhance information beyond them.
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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a straightforward operation, though a bit more detail on the package removal process would not hurt.
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?
No output schema exists. The description does not indicate what the tool returns upon success or failure, nor does it mention any side effects or error conditions. For a removal tool, this is a significant gap.
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 descriptions for both parameters ('Collection ID', 'Credit package ID to remove') are clear and cover 100% of parameters. The tool description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.
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 and resource: 'Remove a credit package from a collection.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add' and 'list' by using 'remove', though it could be more specific about the context (e.g., removing a previously added package).
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., credit removal via other methods), no prerequisites, and no conditions for safe usage. The description is purely declarative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.