Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Frontman for WordPress

by io.github.frontman-ai
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

wc_delete_tax_rate

Destructive

Deletes a WooCommerce tax rate. Ask the user for confirmation before calling with confirm=true. Mirrors woocommerce-mcp-server method delete_tax_rate 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>",
      "rateId": "<rateId>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "wc_delete_tax_rate"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoIf true, permanently delete where WooCommerce supports forced deletion.
rateIdYesThe tax rate ID.
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.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
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 fields. The description adds useful context (local WordPress auth, no REST API keys needed) but leaves the core behavioral ambiguity unresolved: what force=false actually does and whether the rate can be recovered. The "Mirrors woocommerce-mcp-server method delete_tax_rate" sentence is implementation trivia with no bearing on invocation.

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 purpose, then the confirmation protocol, with no wasted setup. The final sentence mixes a useful fact (no API keys required) with an internal implementation reference that does not help an agent decide or call correctly.

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?

For a destructive, non-idempotent delete with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, auth model, and the confirmation gate. It is still silent on the post-deletion outcome and on the difference between force=true and force=false, which an agent making a destructive call would reasonably want.

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 every parameter including confirm and site_id is already documented in the schema. The description's confirmation sentence largely restates the confirm parameter's own description, and it adds nothing about force semantics or the required site_id/rateId relationship. 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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource ("Deletes a WooCommerce tax rate"), which clearly separates it from tax-class or bulk-tax maintenance siblings. It does not name an alternative or state preconditions for choosing delete over update/disable, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is a concrete usage rule for the confirm parameter (ask the user before calling with confirm=true), which is a real gating instruction. However, there is no guidance on when to delete versus deactivate via wc_update_tax_rate, and no stated prerequisites beyond authentication.

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