Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
plane-ce-mcp

plane-ce-mcp

by Bl4nk44
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

delete_work_item_property

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a specific work item property by providing its ID. Supports project-level or workspace scope with optional project and work item type IDs.

Instructions

Delete a work item property by ID.

Args: work_item_property_id: UUID of the property project_id: UUID of the project. Omit for workspace scope. work_item_type_id: UUID of the work item type - omit to use project-level endpoint

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": {
      "work_item_property_id": "<work_item_property_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_work_item_property"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idNo
work_item_type_idNo
work_item_property_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. Description adds scoping nuance but no new behavioral traits beyond what annotations convey. No contradictions.

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?

Description is concise (one sentence plus Args list) and front-loaded. Could remove 'Args:' label, but overall efficient with no unnecessary words.

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?

Basic usage is clear, but lacks details on return values, error handling, or behavior when property doesn't exist. Without output schema, agent may need to infer. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 description coverage is 0%, but description enriches parameter meaning: 'UUID of the property', 'Omit for workspace scope', and 'omit to use project-level endpoint'. This compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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?

The statement 'Delete a work item property by ID' clearly specifies the action (delete) and the resource (work item property). It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_work_item_property_value and delete_work_item_relation_definition.

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?

Provides guidance on when to omit optional parameters: 'Omit for workspace scope' for project_id and 'omit to use project-level endpoint' for work_item_type_id. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives compared to siblings.

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