Skip to main content
Glama

delete_tag

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a tag and remove it from every subscription; the subscriptions and their entries are kept (any left with no tag become Uncategorized). Can't be undone: recreating the tag doesn't restore its subscriptions. To rename it, use update_tag. Fails with a not-found error if the tag isn't the user's (e.g. already deleted).

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": {
      "tagId": "<tagId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_tag"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagIdYesTag ID to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Although annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, the description adds essential context beyond them: subscriptions and entries are kept, untagged subscriptions become Uncategorized, deletion cannot be undone, and recreating the tag will not restore its subscriptions. It also documents the not-found error behavior.

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 front-loaded with the core action and consequences, then adds the rename alternative and failure behavior. Every sentence contributes useful information with 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?

For a one-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers what is deleted, what is preserved, reversibility, alternative tooling, and error conditions. That is enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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% and the single parameter tagId is already documented as the tag ID to delete. The description does not add format or validation detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Delete a tag') and immediately clarifies the scope by stating it removes the tag from every subscription. It also names update_tag as the alternative for renaming, making the operation distinct from sibling tools.

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?

It explicitly says when to use this tool (deleting a tag) and redirects renaming to update_tag. It also describes the failure condition for tags that are not the user's, including already-deleted tags, which helps an agent avoid mistaken calls.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.