Delete multiple consumer records at once by providing their IDs, simplifying bulk removal of consumers from the DEX tenant.
Delete multiple Consumers by their IDs in one request. Requires 'Write' on 'Consumer'.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ids | Yes | Consumer IDs to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does add useful context by specifying the required permission and the batch nature of the request. However, it does not disclose consequences such as irreversibility, partial-failure behavior, or handling of nonexistent IDs, which would be valuable for a destructive delete operation.
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 two sentences with no filler: the first states the action and scope, the second states the permission requirement. Every part earns its place and the key information is front-loaded.
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 low-complexity tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it states what is deleted, the batch scope, how targets are identified, and the required permission. Minor details such as behavior for invalid IDs are absent but not critical for a simple batch delete.
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 schema already fully documents the 'ids' parameter as 'Consumer IDs to delete'. The description's 'by their IDs' adds no substantive meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter documentation.
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 names a specific verb ('Delete'), a resource ('Consumers'), and a clear scope ('multiple... by their IDs in one request'). This distinguishes it from the singular consumers_delete sibling and lets an agent select the correct tool without opening the schema.
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 phrase 'multiple... in one request' clearly establishes this as the batch-deletion variant in contrast to the singular consumers_delete tool. It also states the required 'Write' permission, giving a clear prerequisite. It does not explicitly enumerate when-not cases, but the context is strong enough for a simple one-parameter tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.