Delete a specific row from a table in an open InDesign document by page, table, and row index; optionally specify the target document.
Delete a row from a table
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| rowIndex | Yes | ||
| pageIndex | Yes | ||
| tableIndex | Yes | ||
| document_id | No | Which open document to act on: a name (see document_listOpen) or a 0-based index. Defaults to the front document. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Delete' implies a destructive mutation, but the description says nothing about reversibility, permissions, document state requirements, or side effects.
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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded with no wasted words. However, it is under-specified for a destructive, four-parameter operation rather than appropriately sized.
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?
Given no annotations, no output schema, and low parameter coverage, the description is not complete enough for reliable invocation. It omits preconditions, parameter meaning, and mutation behavior for a destructive table operation.
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 description is silent on all four parameters. With schema description coverage at only 25%, it fails to compensate for the undocumented pageIndex, tableIndex, and rowIndex semantics.
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 concrete verb and resource: deleting a row from a table. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish itself from sibling table operations such as table_deleteColumn or table_splitCell.
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 no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. The agent must infer that this is the correct tool simply from the name and one-line description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.