Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

HelpCenter.io

by io.helpcenter
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete HelpCenter Image

helpcenter_delete_image
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete an uploaded image. The file is removed from storage, so its URL stops working everywhere it is used.

DESTRUCTIVE and irreversible — there is no trash for images.

Refused by default while article content still embeds the image: the API answers 409 and names up to 20 of those articles. Remove or replace the image in them first, or repeat with force: true to delete it anyway, leaving those articles with a broken image. Decide which — do not reach for force by default.

The check reads article content as it is now. It does not see an edit that is staged but unpublished, so do not delete an image you have just placed in a staged change.

Args:

  • image_id (number, required).

  • force (boolean, optional): delete even though articles still embed it.

Returns: { status: "success", deleted: { id, url } }.

Errors: 403 if the key is read-scoped; 404 if the image is not an API upload of this help center; 409 while articles still embed it and force is not set.

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": {
      "image_id": "<image_id>"
    },
    "name": "helpcenter_delete_image"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoDelete even though article content still embeds the image, which is otherwise refused with 409. Those articles then show a broken image — only set this having decided that is acceptable.
site_idNoWhich help center to act on: an id from helpcenter_list_sites. Needed when this connection reaches more than one help center; omit it when it reaches one. Applies to this call only — pass it on every call of a task, and ask the user which help center they mean if their request does not say.
image_idYesId of the image to delete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known; the description nevertheless adds real value beyond them — irreversibility with no trash, the 409 precondition naming up to 20 affected articles, the 403 read-scoped-key case, and the 404 case. However, the 404 on a non-API-upload image sits slightly awkwardly beside idempotentHint=true, and the description never resolves what a repeat delete of an already-removed image returns.

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 destructive warning, then structured into paragraphs, Args, Returns and Errors — easy to scan. The Args block partially restates what the 100%-covered schema already documents, which is mild redundancy in an otherwise waste-free definition.

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-resource operation with no output schema, the description supplies the return shape, the error taxonomy (403/404/409), the force escape hatch and the staged-content caveat. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description goes past it by explaining the decision behind force ("do not reach for force by default") and listing image_id as required. It omits site_id from its Args block entirely, leaving that parameter to the schema alone, which keeps it from a 5.

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 an uploaded image") and immediately adds the consequence that makes it distinct from siblings like helpcenter_get_image or helpcenter_list_images: the file is removed from storage and its URL stops working everywhere. An agent can identify this tool without opening the 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?

Gives explicit when/when-not guidance: the default refusal with 409, the prerequisite of removing or replacing the image in embedding articles first, and force:true as an opt-in alternative with a stated cost (broken images). It also explicitly warns against reaching for force by default and flags the staged-edit blind spot, which is a genuine usage exclusion.

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

All HelpCenter.io 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