Delete a treatment from an Apple experiment test that has not started. Use before launch to remove unused variants and keep test configuration clean.
Delete a treatment from a test that has not started
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| treatmentId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.7.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a deletion and that the test must not have started, but it omits irreversibility, permissions, and effects on related treatment localizations or other resources.
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 one front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary wording. Every word contributes to stating the action and its main precondition.
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 destructive delete tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description is too sparse. It gives the core action and precondition but lacks safety, permission, and parameter guidance needed for reliable invocation.
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 schema has 0% description coverage for the single required parameter, treatmentId. The description only implies that a treatment is being deleted and adds no format, source, or validation details for the parameter beyond what the schema name and type already convey.
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 states a specific verb and resource: delete a treatment from a test. It also distinguishes this from deleting an experiment and from treatment creation/update via the 'not started' scope, but it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.
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 'that has not started' gives an implied precondition for when deletion is valid. However, the description does not explain how to find the treatmentId, what to do if the test has started, or when to use this tool versus updating or deleting the experiment.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.