Delete a browser profile and all its session snapshots by name, optionally forcing removal when the profile is active.
Safely delete a browser profile and all associated session snapshots.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Name of the profile to delete | |
| force | No | Force deletion even if the profile is currently active |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.17.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a genuinely useful destructive side effect — that associated session snapshots are destroyed along with the profile — but it omits irreversibility, whether an active profile blocks deletion, and what 'safely' actually guarantees. Real value beyond the schema, but incomplete for a destructive tool.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with the destructive scope stated up front and no filler. Nothing to trim.
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, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose and cascade destruction but leaves key behavioral questions unanswered — reversibility, active-profile handling without force, and any confirmation requirement. Adequate but noticeably thin given the operation's risk.
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%, so both 'name' and 'force' are already documented in the schema with defaults. The description adds nothing about parameter behavior (e.g., what force=true bypasses), so the baseline 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?
States a specific verb and resource ('delete a browser profile') and adds cascade scope ('all associated session snapshots'), which separates it from vibeside_delete_session_snapshot and vibeside_close_tab. 'Safely' is a vague qualifier that adds no operational meaning, keeping it just short of a 5.
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 when-to-use guidance at all: nothing about when deletion is appropriate versus vibeside_switch_profile or vibeside_close_tab, no prerequisites, and no mention of the alternative behaviors (e.g., refreshing/recreating a profile instead of deleting it). The agent must infer everything from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.