Delete a specific LogicMonitor report by ID with write permissions. Remove unwanted reports to keep your monitoring data organized.
Delete a report (requires write permission)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| report_id | Yes | Report ID to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds the write-permission requirement, which is useful, but it doesn't disclose whether deletion is permanent, whether it cascades to scheduled reports, or what happens to associated data. No contradiction with 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 a single short sentence that front-loads the action and includes the permission note. It is concise and free of filler, though it could add a bit more behavioral context without becoming verbose.
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 delete tool with annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, the description is mostly adequate. However, it doesn't mention whether the deletion is permanent or if there are any side effects (e.g., removing scheduled reports), which would be useful for an agent deciding to call it.
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 only parameter (report_id) is described as 'Report ID to delete'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 clear verb ('Delete') and resource ('a report'), and the permission requirement ('requires write permission') adds useful context. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling delete tools, but the resource is unambiguous.
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 implies usage by naming the resource and permission, but it doesn't state when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_dashboard or delete_alert_rule. No explicit exclusions or alternative routing are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.