Permanently deletes a cancelled booking from the system by booking ID, removing it from the list. Use only for bookings already cancelled.
Remove a cancelled booking from the system. This permanently deletes the booking from the list. Only works for bookings that have been cancelled.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| bookingId | Yes | Booking ID to remove (must be cancelled) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the key trait that the deletion is permanent and that it requires a cancelled booking, but says nothing about permissions, error behavior on non-cancelled bookings, or reversibility guarantees.
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?
Three short sentences, each earning its place: the action, the disambiguation of what 'remove' means (permanent deletion), and the precondition. The critical constraint is front-loaded and there is no filler.
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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, its irreversible nature, and the precondition. It is nearly complete; only error/failure behavior for non-cancelled bookings is unaddressed.
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 parameter is fully documented in the schema, so baseline is 3. The description's 'must be cancelled' constraint only echoes what the schema already states for bookingId, adding no new syntax or format detail.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Remove a cancelled booking') and clarifies the effect ('permanently deletes the booking from the list'). It implicitly distinguishes itself from cancel_booking by requiring the booking to already be cancelled, but never names that sibling or the workflow explicitly.
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?
Provides a clear precondition for use ('Only works for bookings that have been cancelled'), which tells the agent when this tool is applicable. It does not state explicit exclusions or name alternatives such as cancel_booking as the preceding step.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.