Skip to main content
Glama

delete_groups

Destructive

Permanently delete student groups in Skilljar. This cascading hard delete removes memberships and course visibility overrides, so learners may lose access to courses. Enrollments survive; no undo.

Instructions

Delete student groups. THIS IS A HARD DELETE AND IT CASCADES.

    Unlike quizzes and question banks, a group is not soft-deleted. It is removed
    from the database, and everything that points at it goes too:

      * every membership - learners are removed from the group
      * every published-course visibility override granted through this group, which
        means learners can LOSE ACCESS TO COURSES they can currently see
      * other link rows referencing the group

    The learners themselves are not deleted, and their enrollments survive. What is
    lost is the access this group was granting.

    `group_ids` takes the obfuscated ids of the groups to destroy; every id is
    processed independently and a `failed` entry means that group still exists.

    There is no undo. If the intent is to stop using a group while keeping the
    option to restore it, rename it and clear its `rule_email_domains` instead.

    Requires the `student-groups:write` OAuth scope.
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
group_idsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsYes
noteYes
totalYes
failedYes
succeededYes
Install Server

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes far beyond the destructiveHint annotation by detailing what cascade deletion actually entails: memberships removed, published-course visibility overrides removed, potential loss of course access, learners not deleted, enrollments survive, and no undo. This is exactly the kind of behavioral context that annotations alone cannot convey.

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?

The description is long but every sentence earns its place, given the irreversibility and cascading consequences. The key warning ('HARD DELETE AND IT CASCADES') is front-loaded, and the bulleted effects are scannable and precise.

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?

Covers the tool's effect, scope, prerequisites, error semantics, alternatives, and safety implications. With an output schema present, return values do not need explanation. Nothing material is missing for an agent to invoke this safely and correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates: it explains that group_ids takes obfuscated ids, each id is processed independently, and a 'failed' entry means the group still exists. This adds meaningful semantics above the bare array-of-strings schema.

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 student groups') and immediately clarifies that this is a hard delete that cascades, distinguishing it from soft-delete operations like quizzes and question banks. The scope is unambiguous and sets it apart from sibling delete tools.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly contrasts this tool with soft-delete alternatives and provides a concrete alternative ('rename it and clear its rule_email_domains') when the intent is reversible. Also notes the OAuth scope required. An agent can clearly decide when to use this versus other group-related tools.

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

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/CloudSecurityAlliance/csa-skilljar'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server