Permanently remove a completed crawl run after you confirm the run ID. Use this to clean up finished data collection jobs and free storage.
Permanently delete one completed run after explicit confirmation.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| run_id | Yes | ||
| confirm | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure; it does disclose permanence ('Permanently') and the completed-run restriction. However, it does not explain the confirm parameter's role, side effects on associated data, authorization, or the response behavior.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; every phrase ('Permanently', 'one completed run', 'after explicit confirmation') earns its place. The most important destructive and gating traits appear first.
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 tool has an output schema and only two parameters, so the description does not need to cover return values. It is incomplete as a standalone guide because it omits when-not-to-use, the confirm-to-true requirement, and any side-effect or authorization notes, making it adequate but not fully self-sufficient.
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%, but the description indirectly maps run_id to 'one completed run' and maps confirm to 'explicit confirmation.' It fails to state that confirm must be set to true or that run_id identifies the target, leaving some inference to the agent.
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 and target ('Permanently delete one completed run') and includes a distinct state constraint ('completed') and a confirmation gate, clearly separating it from siblings like stop, cleanup, and export. There is no ambiguity about what resource the tool acts on.
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 is given for when to choose this tool over siblings such as cleanup or stop; it does not explicitly state that running or incomplete runs should not be deleted or that the confirmation parameter must be supplied. 'After explicit confirmation' implies a prerequisite but does not provide routing rules or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.