AccountHub

delete_shared_project

Destructive

Delete an AccountHub shared project (shared project) — a group chat — NOT a Slack workspace. Owner only; a one-to-one chat cannot be deleted. It disappears for every member at once: its conversation, to-dos, requests, files and attachments become unreadable for everyone (people and AI), pending invitations and the join link stop working (no email is sent), and every other active member gets a notice in their inbox (list_shared_notices kind project_deleted, with the group name). The owner can restore it within 30 days (list_deleted_shared_projects → restore_shared_project); after 30 days it is erased permanently. Confirm with the user before calling.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_shared_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`project_id`	Yes	The group chat / shared project to delete (from list_shared_projects). Only its owner can; a one-to-one chat cannot be deleted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=true; the description supplies the substantive consequences: content becomes unreadable for everyone including AI, pending invitations and join link break with no email sent, members receive a project_deleted notice, and a 30-day restore window precedes permanent erasure. This is exactly the information an agent needs before an irreversible write.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with what is being deleted and what it is not; every clause carries operational weight (scope, cascade effects, restore window, confirm prompt). It is a dense single block rather than a structured list, which slightly hurts scannability for a destructive action, but there is little wasted text.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers identity, permissions, blast radius, notification side effects, recoverability, and permanence. Nothing an agent needs to call this safely is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is well documented in-schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds provenance (project_id comes from list_shared_projects) and reinforces the owner-only and no-one-to-one-chat constraints, which helps the agent source a valid value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete an AccountHub shared project") and immediately disambiguates it from two likely confusions: a Slack workspace and a one-to-one chat. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like leave_shared_project or update_shared_project without reading the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit preconditions (owner only, not a one-to-one chat), a pre-call instruction ("Confirm with the user before calling"), and names the recovery path (list_deleted_shared_projects → restore_shared_project) as the alternative when the goal is reversal rather than deletion. Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All AccountHub tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?