Staats

Delete site

delete_site

DestructiveIdempotent

PERMANENTLY delete a site and ALL its analytics data (every event and annotation). Irreversible. Confirm with the owner before calling; pass confirm: the site's exact domain.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	Yes	the site's data-site code
`confirm`	Yes	the site's exact domain AS STATED BY THE OWNER when confirming the deletion: never inferred, guessed, or copied from tool output

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	Yes
`site`	Yes
`deleted`	Yes

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint by disclosing that the operation is permanent and irreversible and destroys every event and annotation. This is precisely the behavioral context an agent needs before invoking a delete tool, and it does not contradict the idempotentHint.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

A single front-loaded sentence conveys the key warning, permanence, scope, and action. Every word contributes; there is no filler.

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?

Between the annotations, fully documented schema, output schema, and this description, an agent has all safety and invocation context needed. This is complete for a destructive two-parameter tool.

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?

The input schema already documents both parameters at 100% coverage, including the exact-domain requirement and the warning against inferred/guessed confirm values. The description restates the confirm requirement but adds no new parameter-level information.

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 delete'), the resource ('a site'), and the full scope ('ALL its analytics data — every event and annotation'). This differentiates it from the sibling site tools such as create_site, update_site_context, and get_site_context.

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?

Clearly instructs to confirm with the owner before calling and specifies what to pass in confirm. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use, but the destructive context and sibling list make the intended use clear.

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

All Staats tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool maps to a distinct resource or action: site management, site context, annotations, overviews, dimensional queries, funnels, journeys, and anomaly checks. Overlapping pairs like funnel/journeys are explicitly disambiguated in the descriptions, and what_broke vs what_changed cleanly separate problems from notable movements.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern such as create_site, list_annotations, and update_site_context, but funnel, journeys, portfolio_overview, what_broke, and what_changed break that pattern. The names are still readable and somewhat grouped by intent, but the mixed conventions make it harder to predict a tool's role from its name alone.

Tool Count5/5

At 15 tools this sits at the upper edge of the ideal range, and each tool earns its place: site lifecycle, context, annotation timeline, core analytics, discovery reports, and post-deploy checks are all covered. There is no obvious redundancy or filler.

Completeness4/5

The set covers site management, context editing, annotations, overview/query/funnel/journeys/portfolio analytics, and what_broke/what_changed checks, so most workflows have no dead ends. Minor gaps exist, such as no way to edit or delete a mistaken annotation and no explicit tool for updating data-retention settings, but these are workaroundable rather than blocking.

Resources

Need Help?