Skip to main content
Glama

Delete Git secret

delete_git_secret
Destructive

Permanently delete a stored Git PAT secret by name. Any site deployed with this secret will still work — only future deploys using this secret name will fail. Confirm with the user before calling.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "delete_git_secret"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesName of the secret to delete (from list_git_secrets)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, but the description adds the operation's real-world consequence: existing deployments keep working and only future deploys using that secret name fail. That is exactly the context an agent needs to warn a user, and it goes well beyond the structured fields.

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, each earning its place: what it does, what the blast radius is, and the required confirmation step. The most decision-relevant content is front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the impact of deletion plus the confirmation requirement are covered. The one remaining gap is behavior on a nonexistent name, notable given idempotentHint=false, which the description leaves unstated.

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 coverage is 100% and the 'name' parameter already documents its source (from list_git_secrets). The description only restates that deletion is 'by name', adding no format or lookup detail on its own, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Permanently delete a stored Git PAT secret by name.' That is unambiguous and clearly separable from add_git_secret and list_git_secrets by the verb alone, though no sibling is named explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It supplies one invocation precondition ('Confirm with the user before calling'), which is useful guidance. However, it never states when to choose this over alternatives or where the name comes from (the schema note about list_git_secrets does that work), so usage guidance is implied rather than complete.

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.

Resources