vibedeploy

Delete a site (soft, 7-day recovery)

delete_site

DestructiveIdempotent

Soft-delete a site. confirm=true is required. The site moves to status 'deleted' immediately (its hostname is freed and it stops serving), and is fully purged after the team's recovery window by a sweeper. Use this for the normal 'remove this from my dashboard' flow. The response field 'accepted' is true when the soft-delete is recorded; the response also includes 'purgesAt' so you can tell the user when recovery becomes impossible.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No
`siteId`	No
`confirm`	Yes	Must be exactly true to actually delete the site.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes
`siteId`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`accepted`	Yes
`purgesAt`	Yes	ISO timestamp when the soft-delete becomes a hard purge (~7 days from now).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 6, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / request_id

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Server-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

Changed1 schema field changedJul 20, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / request_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Server-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedJun 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false), the description discloses crucial behavior: the site moves to 'deleted' immediately, the hostname is freed, serving stops, and a sweeper purges it after the recovery window. It also explains the response fields 'accepted' and 'purgesAt', giving the agent useful grounding for user-facing messaging.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core action, then adds necessary lifecycle, usage, and response details. Every sentence contributes value, and there is no redundant restating of the title or schema.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers behavior, recovery semantics, and response fields well, and an output schema exists. However, it is incomplete for invocation because it does not explain how to specify the target site via name/siteId. Given openWorldHint=true and the optional schema properties, an agent cannot be fully certain how to construct a valid call.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With only 33% schema description coverage, the description needed to clarify how name and siteId identify the target site, but it only restates that confirm=true is required. It does not explain whether name, siteId, or both are needed, which one takes precedence, or how the site is selected. This leaves a significant parameter ambiguity.

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?

The description clearly states the action: 'Soft-delete a site', with a concrete resource and an explicit distinction from a hard delete. It also clarifies the 7-day recovery aspect and positions this tool as the normal 'remove this from my dashboard' flow, making it easy to distinguish from siblings like delete_source_file or update_site.

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?

The description provides an explicit use case: 'Use this for the normal remove this from my dashboard flow.' It does not explicitly spell out when not to use it or name alternatives, but the resource scope ('a site') and the soft-delete lifecycle make the intended context clear enough for an agent.

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

All vibedeploy tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.