Permanently delete one music finetune by ID after explicit confirmation and local module enablement.
Permanently delete one music finetune. Requires explicit confirmation and local module enablement.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| finetune_id | Yes | ||
| confirm_delete | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does meaningful work: it discloses irreversibility ("Permanently"), that an explicit confirmation is required, and that a local module must be enabled for the call to work. It stops short of describing failure behavior or what happens to dependent artifacts.
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 short sentences, no filler, with the permanence warning and the prerequisites front-loaded in the order an agent needs them.
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 two-parameter destructive tool with no annotations or output schema, this covers the essentials: irreversibility, the confirmation gate, and the enablement prerequisite. It could add the negative path (default confirm_delete=false behavior) and permission requirements to be fully complete.
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%, so the description must compensate. It explains the meaning behind the confirm_delete flag ("explicit confirmation") but leaves finetune_id undocumented, and does not say what happens if confirm_delete is left at its default of false.
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 effect ("Permanently delete") on a specific resource ("one music finetune"), which cleanly separates it from the sibling list_music_finetunes, get_music_finetune, update_music_finetune, and create_music_finetune tools.
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 word "Permanently" signals this is the destructive path, and it names a prerequisite ("local module enablement"), but it never says when to choose this over update_music_finetune or what to do instead when the module is disabled. The usage context is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.