Delete a deployed project from Shiped by providing its slug. Use this to remove an unwanted project.
Delete a deployed project from Shiped.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Project slug to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply restates the destructive 'delete' action without mentioning permanence, side effects on associated resources, permission requirements, or irreversibility. The added qualifier 'deployed' is minimal and does not disclose consequential behavior.
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, direct sentence that captures the essential operation with no filler. It is front-loaded and every word contributes to meaning.
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 operation, the schema and description together allow correct invocation. However, the lack of any usage guidance or behavioral warning (destructive, irreversible, permissions) leaves gaps that matter for a deletion tool, so it is only minimally acceptable.
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%, so the slug parameter is already well documented as 'Project slug to delete'. The description adds the 'deployed' qualifier, which slightly clarifies the target, but it does not add meaningful semantics beyond the schema. 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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and resource ('a deployed project from Shiped'). It distinguishes this tool from its siblings (deploy_to_shiped, list_shiped_projects), which both involve different operations on the same resource type.
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 about when to use this tool versus the alternatives, prerequisites, or any conditions that would make deletion appropriate. The description only states what the tool does, not why or when an agent should choose it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.