Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
IDA-MCP

IDA-MCP

by Captain-AI-Hub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Delete Stack

delete_stack

Deletes named stack variables from specified functions by function address and variable name, supporting cleanup across one or multiple open IDA Pro databases.

Instructions

Delete stack variable(s) by name.

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": {
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "delete_stack"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYesList of {function_address, name}
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

C2.6/5.0
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 behavioral burden for a destructive mutation. It doesn't say whether deletion is persistent in the IDB, whether it can be undone, what happens to references to the deleted variable, or anything about failure modes with the timeout.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. It is efficient but under-specified rather than genuinely tight, since the brevity leaves real gaps.

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 mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the definition should explain scope of deletion, persistence, and the multi-instance rule. Instead it is a one-line fragment that leaves the agent guessing about side effects.

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%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already documents items, timeout, and the instance_id scoping rule. The description's only added claim ('by name') actually conflicts slightly with the required function_address element, adding noise rather than meaning.

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

Purpose3/5

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

States a concrete verb and resource (delete stack variables), so the gist is clear. But 'by name' misdescribes the actual key: the schema requires a list of {function_address, name} pairs, so the tool is keyed by function address plus name. It also doesn't distinguish itself from nearby siblings like undefine_items or delete_function.

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?

No guidance on when to use this instead of undefine_items, delete_function, or renaming via rename_local_variable. No prerequisites (open database, analysis complete) or warning that the IDB should be saved first.

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