delete_termDelete a Drupal taxonomy term using its vocabulary ID (vid) and term ID (tid). Use it to remove obsolete taxonomy terms from a Drupal site.
Delete a taxonomy term.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tid | Yes | ||
| vid | Yes |
| 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing: not whether deletion is permanent, what happens to child terms, whether terms in use can be deleted, or what permissions are required. For a destructive mutation with zero annotation coverage, this is a serious gap.
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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of padding, which is good, but at four words it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise. It is not wasteful, just empty.
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 output schema exists so return values need not be described, but for a destructive two-parameter tool with no annotations and no schema descriptions, the description leaves everything material (identifier semantics, cascading effects, safety checks) unstated.
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% and both parameters are cryptic abbreviations ('vid' and 'tid'). The description does not expand, disambiguate, or exemplify either, so an agent cannot tell that vid is the vocabulary machine name/ID and tid is the term ID.
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 and resource ('Delete a taxonomy term'), which cleanly distinguishes it from delete_vocabulary and from the create_term/get_term/update_term siblings. However, it offers no explicit differentiation text and says nothing about scope (single term only, by tid within a vid).
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 guidance on when to use this versus update_term or delete_vocabulary, no prerequisites, and no warning about what should be checked first (e.g. whether the term has children or is referenced by content). Usage is only inferable from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.