cadkit

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

cad_delete_feature

Delete a specific feature from an Onshape parametric model using its feature ID. Removes the feature from the design history.

Instructions

Delete a feature by featureId.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "documentId": "<documentId>",
      "workspaceId": "<workspaceId>",
      "elementId": "<elementId>",
      "featureId": "<featureId>"
    },
    "name": "cad_delete_feature"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`documentId`	Yes
`workspaceId`	Yes
`elementId`	Yes
`featureId`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Jun 24, 2026

TDQS

C2.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It merely states 'delete' without disclosing irreversibility, impact on dependent features, permission requirements, or return behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is overly terse. While concise in word count, it fails to provide necessary context for a destructive tool, making it under-specified.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (4 required params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what happens upon deletion or how to interpret results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%. The description only mentions featureId, but there are 4 required parameters. It adds no meaning beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (feature) with a specific identifier (featureId). It distinguishes from siblings like cad_suppress, but could be more specific about scope or side effects.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cad_suppress or cad_edit_feature. Missing prerequisites or context for deletion.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.