Skip to main content
Glama

Staats

by io.github.MrViolets

Delete site

delete_site
DestructiveIdempotent

PERMANENTLY delete a site and ALL its analytics data (every event and annotation). Irreversible. Confirm with the owner before calling; pass confirm: the site's exact domain.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYesthe site's data-site code
confirmYesthe site's exact domain AS STATED BY THE OWNER when confirming the deletion: never inferred, guessed, or copied from tool output

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteYes
siteYes
deletedYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true), the description discloses exactly what gets destroyed: ALL analytics data, every event and annotation. It also adds the irreversible nature and the owner-confirmation requirement, giving the agent critical safety context not present in annotations.

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 with no filler: the first front-loads the permanent, destructive scope; the second provides the essential confirmation rule. Every word earns its place.

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?

The description covers purpose, irreversible data scope, and the exact confirmation requirement. With an output schema present and annotations covering destructive behavior, nothing essential for safe invocation is omitted.

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%, so both parameters are already documented with clear descriptions. The description reinforces the confirm semantics ('pass confirm: the site's exact domain') but does not add novel information beyond the schema, aligning with the baseline for high schema coverage.

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?

The description states the operation with a specific verb and resource: 'PERMANENTLY delete a site and ALL its analytics data (every event and annotation).' It clearly differentiates this from sibling tools like create_site and update_site_context by emphasizing irreversibility and the complete data scope.

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 description gives a strong usage precondition: 'Confirm with the owner before calling' and explains exactly what to pass as confirmation. It does not enumerate alternatives or explicit when-not-to-use conditions, but the irreversible and destructive framing implies this tool is only for permanent removal.

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

All Staats toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target clearly distinct resources or analytic questions: site CRUD, annotation handling, overviews, funnels, journeys, and diagnostic checks are separated. A few tools like get_overview, query, and what_changed could overlap when asking 'what happened', but their descriptions differentiate the intended use well.

Naming Consistency3/5

The CRUD tools follow a clean verb_noun pattern (create_site, delete_site, list_sites, update_site_context), but analysis tools mix bare nouns (funnel, journeys), bare verbs (query), adverb-verb compounds (compare_around), and what_* question phrases (what_broke, what_changed). Naming is readable and snake_case is consistent, but the overall convention is not uniform.

Tool Count5/5

15 tools is within the well-scoped range and each tool earns its place: site management, annotation tracking, traffic overview, discovery, diagnostics, and comparison all have dedicated tools. There is no obvious redundancy or padding.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the core domain well: sites can be created, listed, deleted, and contextualized; annotations can be recorded and listed; analytics support overview, breakdown, funnel, journey, and anomaly questions. Minor gaps exist such as no update/delete for annotations and no single-site getter separate from list_sites, but agents can work around these.

Resources