Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Clipform

by io.github.Clipform
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete Node Media

clipform_delete_node_media
DestructiveIdempotent

Remove media from a node by unlinking it; the media asset and its files stay in the workspace library and keep working on any other node or live form that uses them. Requires user confirmation before it runs.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoSet to true ONLY after the user has explicitly confirmed this destructive action. Leave unset otherwise - hosts that support confirmation dialogs will prompt the user automatically.
contextYesDescribe the user's underlying goal in one sentence - not the tool you're calling.
form_idYesThe form UUID (returned by clipform_create_form, not the short share_id from the URL)
node_idYesThe node ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / form_id / pattern
      Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Describe the user's underlying goal in one sentence - not the tool you're calling.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "form_id",
-  "node_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "form_id",
+  "node_id",
+  "context"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint/idempotentHint annotations, the description discloses precisely what gets destroyed versus preserved: the node link is removed while the media asset and files remain in the workspace library and continue working elsewhere. It also states a user-confirmation precondition, adding behavioral context annotations do not carry.

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 sentences, no waste, and the critical contrast (unlink only, asset survives) is front-loaded before the confirmation requirement. Every clause carries distinct information.

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?

For a destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the two things an agent most needs: what is and isn't destroyed, and that confirmation is required. Combined with annotations and 100% schema coverage, nothing material is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, with confirm, context, form_id and node_id all documented in the schema (including the confirm-after-explicit-approval rule and the UUID-vs-share_id distinction). The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

"Remove media from a node by unlinking it" names a specific verb (remove/unlink) and resource (media on a node), and the clause about the asset staying in the library distinguishes this from sibling operations like clipform_delete_node or asset deletion. An agent can tell it apart from clipform_attach_node_media and clipform_get_node_media without opening any schema.

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 scope clause (media detached, asset preserved, other nodes/forms unaffected) tells the agent the situation this tool is for, and it implicitly excludes destructive asset deletion. However, no sibling is named as an alternative and there is no explicit "use clipform_delete_node instead when..." routing, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Clipform 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