Delete a specific delay profile by its ID to remove unused or outdated download delay rules from Sonarr, keeping your media library configuration accurate.
Delete DelayProfile.
DELETE /api/v3/delayprofile/{id}
Args: id: Path parameter.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the destructive nature is known. The description adds nothing beyond the word 'Delete' and does not elaborate on consequences, reversibility, or any side effects. It fails to add value beyond the structured annotations.
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 extremely terse, but it is not efficiently concise; it is under-specified. It lacks structure and does not front-load any helpful information beyond the endpoint. A single, well-crafted sentence could convey more while remaining concise.
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 simple delete operation, the description is minimal but incomplete. It does not mention what happens on success or failure, whether the deletion is permanent, or any prerequisites. While annotations cover destructive and idempotent aspects, the description fails to provide the kind of context that would help an agent make a confident decision.
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 merely repeats 'id: Path parameter', which is already fully specified in the input schema. It does not explain what the ID represents (e.g., the ID of the delay profile to delete) or any constraints. Since schema coverage is effectively zero in the description, it does not compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.
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 'Delete DelayProfile', which clearly identifies the action and resource. However, this essentially restates the tool's name, and it does not distinguish this from the many other delete_* tools. It provides no additional context about the specific behavior beyond the name.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description gives no context about prerequisites, conditions, or scenarios where this deletion is appropriate or not. It is a bare endpoint description with no usage advice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.