superset-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Delete') which implies a destructive mutation, but doesn't cover critical aspects like permissions needed, irreversibility, side effects (e.g., impact on related objects), or error handling. This is a significant gap for a destructive 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 a single, direct sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, immediately conveying the core action without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature, lack of annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but doesn't address safety, context, or alternatives. The output schema may cover return values, but the description should do more for a mutation tool.

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?

The description mentions 'by ID' which clarifies that the 'pk' parameter is a dataset identifier, adding meaning beyond the schema's basic integer type. However, with 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter, this minimal addition meets the baseline for adequate but not comprehensive parameter explanation.

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 the resource ('a dataset by ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_chart' or 'delete_dashboard' beyond specifying the resource type, which keeps it from a perfect score.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., dataset must exist), exclusions, or compare with related tools like 'delete_chart' or 'delete_dashboard', leaving usage context unclear.

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