Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Frontman for WordPress

by io.github.frontman-ai
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

wc_delete_coupon

Destructive

Deletes a WooCommerce coupon. Ask the user for confirmation before calling with confirm=true. Mirrors woocommerce-mcp-server method delete_coupon using local WordPress authentication; no WooCommerce REST API keys are required.

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": {
      "site_id": "<site_id>",
      "couponId": "<couponId>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "wc_delete_coupon"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoIf true, permanently delete where WooCommerce supports forced deletion.
confirmYesMust be true only after the user explicitly confirms this WooCommerce mutation.
site_idYesThe connected site's id returned by list_sites. Call list_sites first; do not use a URL or WordPress post ID.
couponIdYesThe coupon ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is carried by structured data. The description usefully adds the confirmation workflow and the authentication model (local WordPress auth, no WooCommerce REST API keys), but says nothing about what force=false does to the coupon versus force=true, which is the key behavioral unknown for a destructive tool.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the precondition, then provenance/auth context. No filler, though the upstream-method mirroring note is more internal provenance than agent-facing guidance.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers the critical confirmation gate and auth expectations for a destructive, no-output-schema mutation. However, it leaves the practical consequence of force=true versus force=false unexplained, which is the main thing an agent needs to decide before executing a permanent deletion.

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 all four parameters including confirm and force are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the confirm precondition but adds no syntax, format, or edge-case meaning beyond what the schema states; baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Deletes a WooCommerce coupon'), which is unambiguous and clearly distinct from the create/get/update coupon siblings by the resource and verb alone. It does not need sibling differentiation since no other tool deletes coupons, but it also does not elaborate on scope (e.g. what a coupon deletion entails).

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?

Provides an explicit procedural gate: ask the user for confirmation before calling with confirm=true, which tells the agent the correct call sequence. It stops short of saying when to prefer permanent force deletion versus a non-forced delete, or what to do if the coupon is in use.

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

All Frontman for WordPress 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