twelvebit Analytics

Delete a chart annotation

delete_annotation

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a chart note. Needs confirm: true; without it the tool only shows what it would delete. Get the id from list_annotations.

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": {
      "annotation_id": "<annotation_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_annotation"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`site`	No	Site domain (example.com), id or public id (tb_…). Optional with a site key, or when the account has one site.
`confirm`	No	Set to true to really do it. Without it, the tool only describes what it would do.
`annotation_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 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, idempotentHint=true and readOnly=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the valuable two-mode behavior (default is a non-destructive preview, confirm: true actually deletes), which is not derivable from the annotations; it stops short of saying the deletion is permanent or unrecoverable.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the confirmation protocol, then the id prerequisite. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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?

For a 3-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential agent decisions: the id source and the confirmation gate. Missing pieces are minor — where the site parameter comes from and what is returned after an actual delete.

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 67% and annotation_id has no schema description, so the description's instruction to obtain the id from list_annotations fills that gap. confirm is restated redundantly with the schema, and the site parameter is not addressed at all.

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?

"Delete a chart note" gives a clear verb and resource, and naming list_annotations as the id source separates it from the read/update siblings. The only friction is the terminology swap between 'note' and 'annotation', which the title and sibling name resolve.

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?

It states the confirm: true requirement and explains that omitting it produces a preview rather than a deletion, which is exactly the decision an agent must make before calling a destructive tool. It also points to list_annotations for the required id, though it does not say when deletion is inappropriate versus update_annotation.

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

All twelvebit Analytics 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?