Delete a deck from your Anki collection by supplying its deck ID, removing it from your AnkiWeb-synced deck list.
Delete a deck from your collection. Required: deck_id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| deck_id | Yes | Deck ID to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description says 'Delete', which is inherently destructive, while annotations declare destructiveHint=false. It also omits important consequences such as whether deletion is permanent, what happens to cards in the deck, or whether confirmation is required.
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 short sentences with the action and required parameter front-loaded. There is no wasted text.
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 destructive operation with no output schema and contradictory annotations, the description is too thin. It does not explain side effects, reversibility, or permissions, leaving the agent without critical safety context.
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 description coverage is 100%, and the single parameter is already documented as 'Deck ID to delete'. The description repeats that deck_id is required but adds no further semantic detail, 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 specific verb and resource: delete a deck from the user's collection. It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like deck_create, deck_rename, and deck_list.
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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or when not to use it. The only instruction is the required deck_id parameter.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.