Skip to main content
Glama

Delete a conversion

delete_conversion
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a conversion and its files before the 24 hour retention ends. The download link stops working. This cannot be undone. Needs an API key.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_conversion"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesconversion id

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
deletedYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Where annotations only flag destructiveHint and idempotentHint, the description supplies the concrete consequences: files are removed with the record, the download link stops working, and the action is irreversible. It also discloses the API-key requirement, which annotations do not cover.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its scope, followed by consequences, irreversibility, and the auth requirement. No sentence is redundant and nothing is buried.

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-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers consequences, irreversibility, timing, and auth needs. Nothing an agent needs before invoking it is missing, and return values are already documented by the output schema.

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% with a single 'id' parameter already described as 'conversion id'. The description adds no format hints, examples, or meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (delete) and resource (a conversion), and adds scope detail ('and its files') that a reader could not infer from the name alone. The read-only sibling get_conversion is implicitly distinguished by the explicit delete framing.

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 temporal condition ('before the 24 hour retention ends') that hints at when deletion is meaningful, but never states when an agent should choose deletion versus simply letting retention expire, nor does it exclude any scenarios. Usage context is implied rather than prescribed.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources