Delete a pipeline stage once it is empty. Move or reassign all deals first, because stages with deals cannot be removed.
Delete a stage from a pipeline. The stage must be empty (no deals) — move or reassign deals first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| stageId | Yes | Stage UUID to delete | |
| pipelineId | Yes | Pipeline UUID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.71.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses a critical constraint (empty stage) that would otherwise cause an invocation failure, but it does not mention permissions, irreversibility, or whether deletion has any cascade behavior.
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 no waste. The action is front-loaded, followed immediately by the key operational constraint.
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 two-parameter delete operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential calling constraint. It could be stronger by explicitly stating that deletion is permanent or requires certain permissions, but the most important precondition is present.
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 stageId and pipelineId are already documented. The description confirms the pipeline/stage relationship but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.
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 and resource ('Delete a stage from a pipeline') and is clearly distinct from sibling tools such as conduyt_create_stage, conduyt_update_stage, and conduyt_delete_pipeline.
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?
It states a clear precondition and failure condition: the stage must be empty, and deals must be moved or reassigned first. It does not name a specific alternative tool for moving deals, but the operational guidance is explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.