Delete an assembly constraint by its name. Specify the exact constraint name from the list to remove it.
Delete an assembly constraint by name.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Constraint name, from catia_list_constraints. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description's 'delete' adds no new behavioral information. No mention of irreversibility, failure behavior, or any side effects beyond the annotation.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, no filler. Every word earns its place.
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 one-parameter destructive tool, the description plus schema and annotations provide adequate context: the operation, the required parameter, and the destructive nature. It could mention failure behavior but is sufficient for a simple delete 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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the 'name' parameter and its source. The description's 'by name' adds no additional semantic meaning, matching the baseline for full schema coverage.
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 a specific action (delete), a specific resource (assembly constraint), and the selection criterion (by name). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like catia_delete_element (generic delete) and catia_remove_component (removes components), and aligns with catia_list_constraints for obtaining names.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any preconditions or exclusions. The only hint is in the parameter schema ('from catia_list_constraints'), which is not part of the tool description itself.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.