Delete a CATIA tree element by its reference token. Check dependent features afterward, as later features may enter an error state.
Delete a tree element. Deleting a feature that later features depend on will put those into error, so check catia_list_features afterwards.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| token | Yes | Reference token of the element to delete. |
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 destructive nature is covered. The description adds valuable context about dependent features going into error and recommends verifying with catia_list_features, which goes 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?
Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The primary action is front-loaded, and the dependency warning is placed immediately after, making it easy to scan.
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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential action and the critical risk (dependent features). It could mention the result of deletion or reversibility, but annotations already indicate destructiveness, so nothing critical is missing.
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% and the token parameter is clearly described as 'Reference token of the element to delete'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for high 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 the action clearly ('Delete a tree element') with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling delete tools like catia_delete_constraint and catia_delete_parameter by focusing on tree elements, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.
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 on when to use this vs other delete tools. It does provide a caution about dependencies and suggests checking catia_list_features afterwards, which is useful but not about selecting this tool over alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.