Skip to main content
Glama
2nd1st

open-mcp-apps

by 2nd1st
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Delete app

delete_app
DestructiveIdempotent

Remove an app from the registry while keeping its data, files, and history intact. Use restore_app to bring it back, or erase data permanently in settings.

Instructions

Delete an app from the registry. Its data, files and history are KEPT, and restore_app brings it back. Erasing an app's data for good is the user's, in the settings app.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
actorNo
command_idYesidempotency key — generate a fresh uuid per action

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.10.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / data
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "\"keep\" (default): tombstone, data survives. \"cascade\": delete the app AND the data only it used — two-step confirmed, permanent",
-  "enum": [
-    "keep",
-    "cascade"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / request_state
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "the state from a prior confirmation_required answer — re-send the identical call with it attached",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  2. First observedv0.5.7

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds the non-obvious and decision-critical fact that data, files and history are KEPT and that the action is reversible via restore_app. That materially softens the bare 'destructive' hint and is exactly the kind of context annotations cannot carry.

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 and followed by the retention and reversibility facts. The final sentence is slightly awkward ('is the user's, in the settings app') but still earns its place by preventing misuse.

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 no-output-schema mutation tool, the description covers reversibility, data retention, and the correct owner of permanent erasure. Auth/permission requirements and return behavior are not addressed, but nothing else an agent needs to call it safely is missing.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 33%: only command_id carries a description ('idempotency key — generate a fresh uuid per action'). The description says nothing about name or actor, so it does not compensate for the undocumented parameters even though actor's enum makes it largely self-explanatory.

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 app from the registry') and immediately bounds the scope: only the registry entry goes, not the underlying data. The closing sentence implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling purge_app, which is the tool that erases data.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Names restore_app as the reversal path and explicitly rules out the data-erasure use case, telling the agent that permanent deletion is a user action in the settings app rather than a call it should make. It stops just short of naming purge_app as the sibling alternative, so the routing guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools