Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Frontman for WordPress

by io.github.frontman-ai
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

wc_delete_product_attribute

Destructive

Deletes a WooCommerce product attribute. Ask the user for confirmation before calling with confirm=true. Mirrors woocommerce-mcp-server method delete_product_attribute 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>",
      "attributeId": "<attributeId>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "wc_delete_product_attribute"
  }
}

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.
attributeIdYesThe product attribute ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
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 covered. The description adds genuinely new context — the user-confirmation gate and the local WordPress auth model with no REST keys required — but says nothing about what happens to existing terms or assignments when the attribute is destroyed.

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 confirmation protocol, then the auth note. The final clause about mirroring the woocommerce-mcp-server method and local auth earns its place by answering an auth question an agent would otherwise ask.

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 simple single-resource delete with full schema coverage, annotations, and no output schema, the definition covers action, confirmation gate, and authentication. The remaining gap is failure-mode behavior — e.g. whether deletion is blocked when the attribute is in use or how force interacts with that.

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 every parameter (site_id, attributeId, confirm, force) is already documented in the schema. The description only restates the confirm requirement and adds no new meaning for attributeId or force, so the 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 and resource: deletes a WooCommerce product attribute. The phrase 'product attribute' implicitly separates it from wc_delete_attribute_term, but the description never names that sibling or clarifies the attribute-vs-term distinction explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a procedural precondition ('ask the user for confirmation before calling with confirm=true') but no selection guidance: nothing says when to prefer wc_delete_product_attribute over wc_delete_attribute_term, or what to do if the attribute is still assigned to products.

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