Delete a contact permanently from your PostGrid address book by providing its unique contact ID. This action cannot be undone, so use it to remove outdated or incorrect contact records.
Delete a PostGrid contact. This action cannot be undone.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Contact ID to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It explicitly warns that the action cannot be undone, which is the most important behavioral trait for a destructive operation. It does not cover permissions or response behavior, but for a single-parameter delete this is adequate.
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?
Two short sentences with zero filler. The action is stated immediately, and the critical irreversibility warning is included without bloat.
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?
The tool is simple: one required ID parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects. The description plus schema covers everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly, including the destructive consequence.
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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents the 'id' parameter as 'Contact ID to delete'. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 ('Delete') and resource ('a PostGrid contact'), and is clearly distinct from sibling tools like postgrid_update_contact or postgrid_get_contact. The irreversibility note further reinforces intent.
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?
Implies clear usage: use this when you need to remove a contact by its ID. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no competing contact-deletion sibling exists, so the context is sufficiently clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.