api2pdf_delete_fileDelete a previously generated file by its ResponseId (the ResponseId returned in a generation response). Api2Pdf API: DELETE /file/{ResponseId}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| responseId | Yes | The ResponseId of the generated file to delete (from a prior generation response). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, lowering the burden on the description. The description adds useful behavioral context by clarifying that deletion targets files created by prior generation operations and that the HTTP method is DELETE, reinforcing the irreversible nature of the operation.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences with no redundancy. The core action and required identifier are front-loaded, and the endpoint reference is a compact addition that supports correctness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter destructive operation, the description, schema, and annotations together provide everything needed: what is deleted, which identifier to use, and the safety profile. No output schema is required for a deletion call, and no critical details are missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains that responseId is 'The ResponseId of the generated file to delete (from a prior generation response).' The description adds only minimal value by repeating this and mentioning the endpoint placeholder, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a previously generated file') and identifies the exact identifier required (ResponseId). It also mentions the underlying DELETE endpoint, which clearly differentiates this from the generation, conversion, and status-checking sibling tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It clearly specifies when to use it: to delete a file that was generated previously using its ResponseId. While it does not explicitly list when-not-to-use or alternatives, no other sibling tool performs deletion, so the guidance is functionally complete for tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct operation: conversions, PDF manipulations, file deletion, and account/service info are clearly separated. Even the three HTML-to-PDF tools are distinguished by source type or rendering engine.
All tools follow a consistent api2pdf_ prefix with snake_case verb-based names such as add_password, merge_pdfs, and url_to_pdf. The pattern is predictable and makes it easy to infer what each tool does.
Sixteen tools is slightly above the typical 3-15 range, but the count is justified by the breadth of Api2Pdf's functionality spanning creation, manipulation, conversion, deletion, and account management.
The surface covers the full PDF lifecycle: generate from multiple sources, manipulate via merge/extract/compress/password, convert to markdown, delete files, plus billing and status checks. No obvious missing operations for the documented purpose.