Remove deleted items from a Plex library section by providing its section ID, clearing the trash to reclaim space and keep your library organized.
Empty section trash.
PUT /library/sections/{sectionId}/emptyTrash
Args: section_id: Section identifier
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description 'Empty section trash' clearly implies a destructive operation, yet annotations declare destructiveHint=false. This is a direct contradiction. The description also adds no other behavioral context beyond the bare action.
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 description is very concise and front-loads the action, with the endpoint included for reference. The Args section duplicates the schema, but this is a minor inefficiency.
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 endpoint and parameter are present, but the tool lacks usage context, side effects, or differentiation from siblings. Given the simple one-parameter nature and existing output schema, it is adequate but not 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?
The description's 'section_id: Section identifier' is redundant with the schema's 'Section Id' and adds no new semantics. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, though the parameter is a simple identifier.
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 states the specific action 'Empty section trash' with a clear resource. However, it does not differentiate from the similar sibling create_library_sections_by_section_id_empty_trash, which could cause confusion.
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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes a create_ variant with the same suffix and a get_ variant, but the description does not mention any distinguishing conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.