Deletes service reference copies created by the site for a workflow without touching source files or results; run a dry run first to preview removals.
Удалить служебные копии референсов (source_kind=reference_copy), которые сайт создаёт сам. Исходники и результаты не трогает. Сначала dryRun.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| kind | Yes | ||
| dryRun | No | ||
| account | No | ||
| confirm | No | ||
| maxItems | No | ||
| workflowId | Yes | ||
| allowUsedOnCanvas | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.9.13Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
This is excellent behavioral disclosure: the description guarantees that 'sources and results are not touched' ('Исходники и результаты не трогает'). This vital scope information significantly enhances understanding beyond the generic 'destructiveHint: true' annotation.
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 text is highly efficient and front-loaded. It addresses the What (delete utility copies), the Where (references), the Safety (sources/results untouched), and the How (dryRun first) in a very concise manner.
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?
The definition provides a complete conceptual picture of the tool: its target, its boundaries (what it won't affect), and its operational safety requirement. This is crucial given the destructive nature of the 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?
Given the 0% schema description coverage, the description is essential. It defines the target object type (utility copies of references) which provides the conceptual meaning behind the parameters it acts upon.
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 identifies the function as deleting 'utility copies of references' and specifies the scope ('source_kind=reference_copy'), distinguishing this operation from deleting main sources or results.
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?
It provides explicit operational guidance by stating, 'First, dryRun,' which is critical for any destructive action. While it doesn't compare itself to siblings, it advises on a necessary sequence of use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.