dForms

Delete a response

delete_response

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete one response for good, with its answers. There is no undo. Destructive: it deletes or replaces data, so it is best confirmed with the user first, naming exactly what will change. After an error or a timeout, a read shows whether the change went through, so a blind retry is not needed. NOT_FOUND after a timeout usually means the delete went through.

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": {
      "form_id": "<form_id>",
      "response_id": "<response_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_response"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`form_id`	Yes	The form id, from list_forms or get_form.
`response_id`	Yes	The response id, from list_responses.
`workspace_id`	No	The workspace this call acts in: an id from list_my_workspaces. Required for a person signed in with several workspaces and for staff of this deployment; optional with an API key or with only one workspace.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`deleted`	Yes
`workspace`	Yes	The workspace this call acted in, to compare with the one the user means.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description still adds real value beyond them: it explains the irreversibility, the read-after-timeout verification pattern, and that NOT_FOUND after a timeout usually means the delete succeeded – retry semantics an agent cannot get from the structured fields.

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 the action and its irreversibility, then the operational guidance. Slightly redundant in restating 'Destructive: it deletes or replaces data' after 'There is no undo', but the wasted words are minimal.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists and annotations cover openness and idempotency, so the description needn't explain return values. It completes the picture with the confirmation requirement and post-timeout verification. It could still mention how it differs from the bulk delete sibling.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and all three parameters carry their own descriptions with sourcing hints (list_forms, list_responses, list_my_workspaces). The description adds nothing about parameters, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 one response') and adds scope ('for good, with its answers'), which also separates it from the sibling delete_responses that operates in bulk.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives clear operational guidance: confirm with the user first, naming exactly what will change. It does not explicitly contrast with delete_responses or say when not to delete at all, but the singular scope plus the confirmation requirement give strong context.

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

All dForms 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?