Well

Delete canvas

well_delete_canvas

Destructive

Soft-delete one board after confirmation. Use canvas_view_id from well_show_canvas or the canvas_views records. Only its author or a workspace owner or administrator can delete it. The same transaction revokes the board's share links.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`workspace_id`	No	Target workspace. Omit when the token authorizes one workspace. Required when it authorizes several — a write lands in exactly one workspace and this call would not say which.
`canvas_view_id`	Yes
`conversation_id`	No	The conversation id returned by the previous Well result, in its meta under well/conversation_id, in its structuredContent, or in its JSON text block. Pass it back on every call in the same conversation, including a call a card makes, so the chosen workspace and the earlier answers still apply. It decides the conversation on its own: nothing the host states about the session replaces it. Omit it only on the first call of a conversation.
`idempotency_key`	No	Optional client-supplied key. A retried write with the same key returns the original result instead of re-applying the operation.
`workspace_scope`	No	Restrict this call to the family: the token's primary workspace plus the company workspaces under it that you are a member of. Unrelated authorized workspaces drop out of the read; row reads merge across the family, while a per-workspace figure still reports exactly one workspace.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	No
`error`	No
`success`	Yes
`reply_lines`	No
`conversation_id`	No	The conversation this result belongs to. Pass it back as the conversation_id argument on every later Well call in the same conversation.
`near_candidates`	No
`newly_connected`	No	Tools that connected to this workspace since the last result and that no session was told about yet, oldest first. Present only when at least one tool is new. The connected-line rule says when to tell an entry; when it does, one line per entry, in the person's language: "<name> is connected.". Never fold several entries into one sentence. Each entry comes back once, on one result only: never repeat its line later.
`conversation_id_note`	No	Present only when the server opened a fresh lane, stating that no choice recorded earlier was read.
`conversation_id_source`	No	Where the conversation id came from: the host's own request meta, the caller's argument, or a fresh lane the server opened.
`near_candidates_truncated`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 28, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / code
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / near_candidates

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "company_id": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "name": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "company_id",
+      "name"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / near_candidates_truncated
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / reply_lines

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

AddedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and not read-only, and the description adds substantial context: it is a soft delete, requires confirmation, is permission-gated, and revokes share links in the same transaction. This goes well beyond the annotation coverage.

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?

The description is three compact sentences with the core action first, followed by identifier sourcing, permissions, and side effects. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 destructive mutation with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the important behavioral context: soft-delete semantics, confirmation, authorization, and share-link revocation. It is close to complete, though it could note idempotency behavior explicitly.

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 80%, so the schema already carries most parameter meaning. The description only adds source guidance for canvas_view_id and says nothing extra about workspace_id, conversation_id, idempotency_key, or workspace_scope, so this is adequate but not enriched.

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: "Soft-delete one board." It also names the required identifier source, making clear this is a canvas/board deletion operation rather than a generic delete or update.

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 names when to use it and where to get the identifier from (well_show_canvas or canvas_views records), and it states authorization constraints. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as update/replace operations, but the context is clear.

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

All Well tools Inspect

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

Need Help?