Skip to main content
Glama

Delete task

delete_task
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a task (admin, project manager or project lead). It goes to the deleted list and can be restored with restore_task.

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": {
      "task": "<task>"
    },
    "name": "delete_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskYesTask Mongo id or task number such as ZERO-41

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds genuinely new context that the deletion is soft (goes to the deleted list) and reversible via restore_task, plus the permission gate. It omits side effects on subtasks, comments, attachments and logged time, which matter for a destructive operation.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler, and the permission constraint plus the soft-delete/restore fact are front-loaded where an agent will read them.

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?

For a one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the definition covers permissions, soft-delete semantics and the recovery tool, which is what an agent needs to act safely. The only meaningful omission is cascade behavior toward related records.

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?

Only one parameter exists and the schema documents it fully at 100% coverage, including the accepted 'ZERO-41' style identifier. The description adds nothing about identifier formats or resolution behavior, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a task') and adds scope via the permission roles in parentheses. It is clearly distinct from delete_task_comment and update_task, though differentiation relies mostly on the name rather than an explicit contrast with siblings.

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?

Gives a real precondition (admin, project manager or project lead) and points to restore_task as the reversal path, which is the main alternative an agent would need. It does not state when deletion is inappropriate versus, say, completing or archiving a task.

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.