Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

autario-mcp

by io.github.Autario
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

delete_app

Destructive

Delete an app YOU own, for good: its code (every uploaded file), its manifest, its saved artifacts, what each viewer saved in it (per-viewer state and images), its share links, team roles on it and its review history all go in one step, and a published app leaves the app store and its URLs stop working at once. Your datasets are NOT touched: connector data from Shopify, GA4 or Instagram and any World Bank or FRED table stay as they are. There is no undo and no archive, so pass confirm: true only after the user said to delete this app by name; to just take it off the store use unpublish_app instead. First-party autario apps and apps you do not own answer not found.

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": {
      "app_id": "<app_id>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "delete_app"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
app_idYesId of an app you own, as returned by create_app. An app you do not own answers not found.
confirmYesMust be true. A call without it deletes nothing.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation, the description discloses the full blast radius (code, manifest, artifacts, per-viewer state and images, share links, team roles, review history), the external side effect (leaves the app store, URLs stop working at once), the irreversibility ('no undo and no archive'), and the not-found behavior for first-party or non-owned apps. This is materially richer than 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 purpose is front-loaded and every clause carries real information (destruction scope, side effects, exclusions, alternative). It is dense and runs long as a single sprawling sentence, which costs a point on structure but not on relevance.

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?

With annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema required, the description supplies everything an agent needs: irreversibility, side effects, ownership/not-found behavior, the confirm gate, and the safer sibling for the publish/unpublish case. Nothing material is left to inference.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds an operational precondition for confirm that the schema does not state ('pass confirm: true only after the user said to delete this app by name'), and reinforces the ownership constraint on app_id, though it largely restates the schema's 'not found' wording.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete an app YOU own, for good') and enumerates exactly what the deletion covers. It explicitly contrasts with the sibling unpublish_app and with delete_dataset semantics ('your datasets are NOT touched'), so an agent can distinguish it without opening a schema.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition for use ('pass confirm: true only after the user said to delete this app by name') and names the alternative for the adjacent intent ('to just take it off the store use unpublish_app instead'). When-not-to-use is also covered by the ownership and first-party app exclusions.

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

All autario-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources