CatchAll (by NewsCatcher)

delete_project

Delete a project.

By default the project's resources (jobs, monitors, etc.) are detached but kept. Set delete_resources=true to also delete the contained jobs, monitors, datasets, and monitor groups. Webhooks are the exception: they are never deleted by this operation — an attached webhook is only detached from the project and keeps working (it may belong to other projects or resources independently of this one).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`api_key`	No	CatchAll API key. Optional if provided via x-api-key header or CATCHALL_API_KEY env var.
`project_id`	Yes	The project ID to delete.
`delete_resources`	No	If true, also delete the project's resources except webhooks, which are always detached rather than deleted (default false).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that resources are detached but kept by default, that delete_resources=true also deletes them, and that webhooks are never deleted but only detached. This non-obvious exception is crucial for an agent to understand the side effects. No annotations to contradict.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose statement followed by a focused paragraph on behavior. Every sentence adds necessary context (default behavior, delete_resources effect, webhook exception) without any filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the absence of annotations, the description fully covers the behavioral aspects of a destructive operation: default non-destructive resource handling, the destructive flag, and the webhook exception. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be explained. The description is complete for an agent to safely invoke this tool.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the 'detached but kept' behavior and the webhook exception in detail, clarifying the real-world impact of the delete_resources flag. It also mentions the types of resources affected (jobs, monitors, datasets, monitor groups), which enriches the schema's bare description.

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 starts with a clear verb+resource statement: 'Delete a project.' It then specifies the scope of the operation, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_dataset or delete_job by explaining the effect on contained resources. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and differentiated.

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 clear context on when to use the tool and how the delete_resources flag changes behavior, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., using individual resource deletion tools). This is a strong implicit usage guideline but not an explicit when/when-not statement.

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

All CatchAll (by NewsCatcher) 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

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool is scoped to a specific resource type and action, with clear distinctions between similarly named operations (e.g., pull_results vs pull_job_csv, initialize_query vs validate_query). No two tools appear to perform the same function.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tools consistently use snake_case verb_noun patterns (create_X, get_X, list_X, update_X, delete_X), with domain-specific verbs like submit, pull, initialize, and validate adding semantic clarity. Minor deviations such as pull_* vs get_* and compound names like create_dataset_from_csv are still predictable.

Tool Count2/5

At 60 tools, the server is heavily overstuffed for a single MCP surface. While the broad domain (datasets, entities, jobs, monitors, projects, webhooks) justifies many operations, the sheer volume exceeds typical recommended limits and includes near-duplicates (pull_results vs pull_job_csv, get_dataset vs get_dataset_status), making agent tool selection unwieldy.

Completeness4/5

The tool set provides robust CRUD and lifecycle coverage for all major resources, including special operations like csv import, webhook mapping, and monitor enable/disable. Minor gaps such as the absence of a get_monitor (single monitor details) and no cancel_job can be worked around via list_monitors and waiting for job completion.

Resources

Need Help?