Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

OrgGen AI

by ai.orggen
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

delete_project

Destructive

Permanently deletes a project and ALL its data (cells, people, assignments, dependencies, content blocks, versions, comments) — irreversible. Owner-only, even editors cannot delete. Requires confirm:true as an explicit safety gate. REFUSED (nothing is deleted) when the project holds a signed, sealed version — legal evidence: the attestation PDF is the proof, and the project stays; while a sealed version exists, deletion stays refused.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmYesMust be exactly `true` — an explicit safeguard against an accidental deletion. Irreversible action: deletes the project and all its data (blocks, people, versions, comments...).
projectIdYesUUID of the project to delete, as returned by list_projects.
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. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"Doit être exactement `true` — garde-fou explicite contre une suppression accidentelle. Action irréversible : supprime le projet et toutes ses données (cellules, personnes, versions, commentaires...)."New value: +"Must be exactly `true` — an explicit safeguard against an accidental deletion. Irreversible action: deletes the project and all its data (blocks, people, versions, comments...)."
    • 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 / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"UUID du projet à supprimer, tel que list_projects le rend."New value: +"UUID of the project to delete, as returned by list_projects."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"UUID du projet à supprimer. Utiliser list_projects pour le retrouver."New value: +"UUID du projet à supprimer, tel que list_projects le rend."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive/irreversible mutation, but the description adds substantial context they don't carry: the exact cascade of destroyed data, the owner-only authorization requirement, the confirm safety gate, and the legal refusal rule tied to sealed-version attestation. This is exactly the 'what gets destroyed / auth needs' detail the annotations cannot express.

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 destructive scope and irreversibility, then the constraints. Mostly tight, though the 'legal evidence: the attestation PDF is the proof' clause is slightly extraneous detail that dilutes an otherwise efficient sentence.

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 destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, irreversibility, authorization, the confirm gate, and the important refusal case. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it safely 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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (projectId, confirm, expectedProjectId) are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the confirm:true gate but adds no format or syntax beyond what the schema provides; 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 ('Permanently deletes') and resource ('a project and ALL its data'), then enumerates the cascade (cells, people, assignments, dependencies, content blocks, versions, comments). This is clearly distinguishable from the sibling delete_project_metadata, which would not touch the project itself.

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?

Explicit when-conditions: owner-only (editors cannot), requires confirm:true, and the precise when-not case — refusal while a signed, sealed version exists. It does not name an alternative tool (e.g., delete_project_metadata or archiving) for the refused scenario, keeping it just short of a 5.

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