clean_nodes_aiClean duplicate or malformed Drupal nodes using AI. It detects and removes bad content, requiring confirm=true to delete.
Clean duplicate or malformed nodes using AI. Requires confirm=True to execute deletions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| bundle | Yes | ||
| confirm | No | ||
| dry_run | No | ||
| entity_type | Yes | ||
| max_deletes | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that AI is involved and that deletions require confirm=True, but leaves ambiguous what 'cleaning' actually does (merge, delete, normalize?), what data is destroyed, whether it is reversible, and what permissions are needed.
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?
Two front-loaded sentences with no filler; the purpose comes first and the safety gate second. It is perhaps too terse for a destructive AI operation, but not padded.
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 destructive, AI-driven mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is sparse. It omits what the operation returns, how duplication/malformation is detected, whether changes are logged or reversible, and what happens when confirm is omitted or false.
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 0% for the required entity_type and bundle parameters, so the description must compensate. It only explains confirm=True and says nothing about the semantics or expected values of entity_type and bundle.
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 ('Clean'), resource ('duplicate or malformed nodes'), and mechanism ('using AI'), which distinguishes it from generic node CRUD siblings like delete_node or update_node. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the purpose is unambiguous.
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 gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over delete_node, update_node, or analyze_content_quality, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Only the confirm requirement is mentioned, which is an operational detail rather than usage routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.