discard_sessionDelete a session's private mapping instantly to prevent data restoration, ensuring no patient identifiers remain accessible after the session ends.
Delete a session's private mapping immediately instead of waiting for expiry. Idempotent. After this, no restoration is possible for that session.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| session_id | Yes | The session_id to discard. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint false, openWorldHint false), the description adds crucial behavioral details: immediate deletion rather than waiting for expiry, idempotency, and permanent irreversibility. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs to know before invoking a destructive operation.
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?
Each sentence earns its place: it states the action, the idempotency trait, and the irreversible consequence. There is no filler or repetition, and the most important operational fact ('immediately instead of waiting for expiry') is front-loaded.
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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation, the effect, and the consequence. It does not specify error handling for unknown session IDs or return values, but these are not necessary for basic correct invocation and the description is otherwise complete.
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%, with the single session_id parameter fully described in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, 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?
The description uses a specific verb ('Delete') with a clear resource ('a session's private mapping') and distinguishes the behavior from the default expiry-based cleanup. It also contrasts with the sibling 'reinstate' by stating that no restoration is possible afterwards, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.
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 description clearly frames when this tool is appropriate: when immediate deletion is desired instead of waiting for expiry. It also implicitly communicates the irreversible nature, acting as a cautionary usage signal, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide a when-not-to-use list.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.