Permanently deletes a Tealfabric process by its ID, removing it from the platform when it is no longer needed.
Hard-delete a Tealfabric process by ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| process_id | Yes | Process ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Hard-delete' is a genuine value-add, disclosing permanence/irreversibility that annotations would otherwise signal via destructiveHint. However, it omits cascading effects (does deleting a process also delete its steps?), required permissions, and any confirmation/error 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?
One short sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, zero filler. No restructuring needed.
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?
Adequate for a simple one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, but it leaves out cascade semantics and permissions — details that matter specifically for an irreversible delete and that annotations would otherwise cover.
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?
Only one parameter, and schema description coverage is 100% with process_id documented. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, but with a single fully-documented identifier the baseline of 4 applies.
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?
States a specific verb (hard-delete), resource (Tealfabric process) and selector (by ID). The qualifier 'hard' implicitly separates it from the sibling tealfabric_retire_process (soft retire) without naming it, so an agent can mostly tell them apart.
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 explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance. The word 'hard-delete' hints that this is the permanent option versus tealfabric_retire_process / tealfabric_delete_process_step, but the agent must infer that contrast rather than being routed to it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.