Skip to main content
Glama

Delete task

well_delete_task
Destructive

Delete a task from the current workspace (soft delete). Its task-project links are removed with it.

Use this tool when the user asks to delete or remove a task. Never delete a to-do to replace it or to tidy up after another write; to change a to-do's date, use well_update_task. Find the task_id first with the task list or well_query_records. When more than one task could be the one meant, ask which one and delete nothing.

REQUIRED: task_id.

A task synced from a connected work tool is not deleted: the next sync could bring it back. The call then fails before any card and nothing is deleted. A guest cannot delete tasks. The person confirms the delete on a card before anything is removed.

Returns { success: true, task_id } on success, or { success: false, error } on failure.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idYesThe task to delete.
workspace_idNoTarget 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.
conversation_idNoThe 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_keyNoOptional client-supplied key. A retried write with the same key returns the original result instead of re-applying the operation.
workspace_scopeNoRestrict 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

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNo
errorNo
successYes
task_idNo
reply_linesNo
conversation_idNoThe conversation this result belongs to. Pass it back as the conversation_id argument on every later Well call in the same conversation.
near_candidatesNo
newly_connectedNoTools 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_noteNoPresent only when the server opened a fresh lane, stating that no choice recorded earlier was read.
conversation_id_sourceNoWhere the conversation id came from: the host's own request meta, the caller's argument, or a fresh lane the server opened.
near_candidates_truncatedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • 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"
      +}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes well past the annotations by disclosing that the delete is soft, that project links are removed with it, that synced tasks fail before any change, that guests cannot delete, and that a confirmation card gates the removal. Only the retry/idempotency interplay is left implicit, so it falls just short of the top score.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the reason to pick it, then broken into short scannable paragraphs. Minor redundancy across 'delete nothing', 'nothing is deleted', and 'before anything is removed' costs it the top score.

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 single-target mutation, the description covers preconditions, failure modes, side effects, and confirmation behavior, and an output schema already exists so the return shape is a bonus rather than a burden. Nothing an agent needs before calling 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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters; the description only restates that task_id is required and points to well_list_tasks/well_query_records as ways to obtain it. It adds no meaning for workspace_id, conversation_id, idempotency_key, or workspace_scope beyond the schema.

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 a task) plus the scope (current workspace) and the side effect on task-project links, which lets an agent separate it from well_update_task and well_get_task 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?

Explicit when-to-use (user asks to delete or remove a task), explicit when-not (not to replace a to-do or tidy up after another write), a named alternative for the adjacent intent (well_update_task for date changes), a prerequisite on how to obtain task_id, and a disambiguation rule to ask when ambiguous.

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.

Resources