Skip to main content
Glama

Delete Phase

delete_phase
Destructive

Delete phase. Review dependent-record effects before confirming. MCP approval requirements are configurable by the organization administrator; business workflow approvals always apply.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_phase"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, and the description adds useful context: dependent-record effects should be reviewed, and approval requirements may be configured by administrators while business workflow approvals always apply. It still does not specify exactly which dependent records are affected or whether deletion is reversible, but it meaningfully supplements the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loaded with the core action. The approval sentence is relevant context, though slightly generic, and the dependent-record warning could be more specific rather than purely cautionary.

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?

Given the existing output schema, rich destructive annotations, and simple one-parameter shape, the description is largely complete for calling the tool safely. The main remaining gap is that it warns about dependent-record effects without identifying what those effects are.

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?

There is one required parameter, id, with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not mention the parameter at all, so it does not compensate by explaining which phase identifier is expected or how it should be obtained.

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: "Delete phase." That is clear enough for an agent to distinguish deletion from siblings like get_phase or update_phase, but it does not explicitly call out those alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives a procedural caution to review dependent-record effects, but it does not say when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor when deletion should be avoided in favor of archiving or updating. Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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