Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

OrgGen AI

by ai.orggen
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

delete_data_source

Destructive

Deletes a data-source block and all its lineage connections. The deletion is PERMANENT: no trash and no undo by the tool (only a version saved before the call, via restore_version — which replaces the WHOLE schema —, gets back what was deleted). It takes away what is listed here and what depends on the block (its content, its sharing grants, its block links); the attached comments, tasks and documents are not destroyed (they survive, detached). This is NOT an erasure of personal data: that goes through deleting the account or the project. If comment threads were anchored on it, they SURVIVE (they are not destroyed) but become invisible on the canvas: reported via orphanedComments + note. Same for the attached TASKS (create_tasks): they survive, move to 'No subject' and re-attach automatically if a block with the same id is recreated — reported via detachedTasks + note.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesDeletes the block + cascades to meta and lineage
expectedProjectIdNoUUID of the project targeted by THIS call. ACTUALLY targets this project instead of the session project. Refused without changing anything if access is not granted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / expectedProjectId / description
      Previous value: -"UUID du projet visé par CET appel. Cible RÉELLEMENT ce projet au lieu du projet de session. Refusé sans rien modifier si l'accès n'est pas accordé."New value: +"UUID of the project targeted by THIS call. ACTUALLY targets this project instead of the session project. Refused without changing anything if access is not granted."
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Supprime la cellule + cascade sur meta et lineage"New value: +"Deletes the block + cascades to meta and lineage"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description goes far beyond: permanence with no trash/undo, what is cascaded (content, sharing grants, block links), and what survives detached (comments, tasks, documents) with the re-attach semantics. It also discloses the orphanedComments/detachedTasks reporting, which annotations cannot convey.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The permanence warning is well front-loaded, but the body repeats the same survival claim for comments and tasks after already stating it generically, and the heavy ALL-CAPS emphasis adds noise. Information is dense but not efficiently structured.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly compensates by explaining return signals (orphanedComments + note, detachedTasks + note). For a destructive cascading delete with 100% schema coverage, nothing material is missing.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or behavioral detail about `id` or `expectedProjectId` (e.g., how the project override interacts with the session project), so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ("Deletes a data-source block") plus the cascade scope ("and all its lineage connections"). The scope is precise, but it never names a sibling (e.g., delete_content_block, delete_cell) to route the agent when the block type is ambiguous.

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 an explicit when-not ("This is NOT an erasure of personal data: that goes through deleting the account or the project") and names the recovery alternative (restore_version). The agent knows both the boundary and the fallback path.

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

All OrgGen AI toolsInspect
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