Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
IDA-MCP

IDA-MCP

by Captain-AI-Hub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Delete Function

delete_function

Deletes an existing function from an IDA Pro database using its start or internal address; specify an instance when multiple databases are open.

Instructions

Delete an existing function.

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": {
      "address": "<address>"
    },
    "name": "delete_function"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesFunction start or internal address (hex or decimal)
timeoutNoTimeout in seconds
instance_idNoREQUIRED whenever more than one database is open (from open_database's result or list_databases()); optional only while exactly one instance is live.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / instance_id / description
      Previous value: -"Instance id override"New value: +"REQUIRED whenever more than one database is open (from open_database's result or list_databases()); optional only while exactly one instance is live."
  2. First observedv0.9.7

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not say whether deletion is reversible, what happens to xrefs/callers, whether the change persists to the IDB without save_database, or what happens if the address isn't a function start — all critical for a destructive mutation.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste, but its brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficiency. There is room for a short clause on irreversibility or instance requirements without bloat.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive, no-annotation, no-output-schema operation, the definition leaves too much unstated: reversibility, persistence, error conditions, and the multi-instance requirement buried only in the schema. An agent could call it correctly by name but not confidently.

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 description coverage is 100%, including the important instance_id constraint, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds nothing about how 'address' resolves (start vs. internal) or timeout behavior, which is acceptable at full coverage but not value-adding.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb ('Delete') plus resource ('an existing function'), so an agent immediately knows the operation. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like create_function, undefine_items, or delete_segment, which could plausibly overlap in intent.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as undefine_items, nor any prerequisites (e.g., analysis completed, correct database instance open). The agent is left to infer everything from the name alone.

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