Skip to main content
Glama
DeanWard

HAL (HTTP API Layer)

HTTP DELETE Request

http-delete

Send an HTTP DELETE request to a specific URL with custom headers. Supports secret substitution in URLs and headers using HAL environment variables for secure API interactions.

Instructions

Make an HTTP DELETE request to a specified URL with optional headers. Supports secret substitution using {secrets.key} syntax in URL and headers where 'key' corresponds to HAL_SECRET_KEY environment variables.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
headersNo
urlYes

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:649-662 (registration)
    Registration of the 'http-delete' tool, including input schema validation and the handler function that invokes makeHttpRequest with method 'DELETE'.
    server.registerTool(
      "http-delete",
      {
        title: "HTTP DELETE Request",
        description: "Make an HTTP DELETE request to a specified URL with optional headers. Supports secret substitution using {secrets.key} syntax in URL and headers where 'key' corresponds to HAL_SECRET_KEY environment variables.",
        inputSchema: {
          url: z.string().url(),
          headers: z.record(z.string()).optional()
        }
      },
      async ({ url, headers = {} }: { url: string; headers?: Record<string, string> }) => {
        return makeHttpRequest('DELETE', url, { headers });
      }
    );
  • Shared handler function that executes all HTTP requests (including DELETE), handling secret substitution in URL/headers/body, URL allowlisting/blacklisting, fetch execution, response parsing, and redacting secrets from output.
    async function makeHttpRequest(
      method: string,
      url: string,
      options: {
        headers?: Record<string, string>;
        body?: string;
        queryParams?: Record<string, any>;
      } = {}
    ) {
      try {
        const { headers = {}, body, queryParams = {} } = options;
        
        // First, substitute secrets in URL to get the final URL for validation
        // We need to do this in two passes to handle URL restrictions properly
        const processedUrl = substituteSecrets(url, url);
        
        // Now substitute secrets in headers, body, and query parameters using the processed URL
        const processedHeaders = substituteSecretsInObject(headers, processedUrl);
        const processedBody = body ? substituteSecrets(body, processedUrl) : body;
        const processedQueryParams = substituteSecretsInObject(queryParams, processedUrl);
        
        // Build URL with query parameters
        const urlObj = new URL(processedUrl);
        Object.entries(processedQueryParams).forEach(([key, value]) => {
          if (value !== undefined && value !== null) {
            urlObj.searchParams.set(key, String(value));
          }
        });
        
        const finalUrl = urlObj.toString();
        
        // Check global URL whitelist/blacklist
        const urlCheck = isUrlAllowedGlobal(finalUrl);
        if (!urlCheck.allowed) {
          throw new Error(urlCheck.reason || 'URL is not allowed');
        }
        
        const defaultHeaders = {
          'User-Agent': 'HAL-MCP/1.0.0',
          ...processedHeaders
        };
        
             // Add Content-Type for methods that typically send data
         if (['POST', 'PUT', 'PATCH'].includes(method.toUpperCase()) && processedBody && !('Content-Type' in processedHeaders)) {
           (defaultHeaders as any)['Content-Type'] = 'application/json';
         }
        
        const response = await fetch(finalUrl, {
          method: method.toUpperCase(),
          headers: defaultHeaders,
          body: processedBody
        });
    
        const contentType = response.headers.get('content-type') || 'text/plain';
        let content: string;
        
        // HEAD requests don't have a body by design
        if (method.toUpperCase() === 'HEAD') {
          content = '(No body - HEAD request)';
        } else {
          try {
            if (contentType.includes('application/json')) {
              const text = await response.text();
              if (text.trim()) {
                content = JSON.stringify(JSON.parse(text), null, 2);
              } else {
                content = '(Empty response)';
              }
            } else {
              content = await response.text();
            }
          } catch (parseError) {
            // If JSON parsing fails, try to get text
            try {
              content = await response.text();
            } catch (textError) {
              content = '(Unable to parse response)';
            }
          }
        }
    
        // Redact secrets from response headers and content before returning
        const redactedHeaders = Array.from(response.headers.entries())
          .map(([key, value]) => `${key}: ${redactSecretsFromText(value)}`)
          .join('\n');
        const redactedContent = redactSecretsFromText(content);
    
             return {
           content: [{
             type: "text" as const,
             text: `Status: ${response.status} ${response.statusText}\n\nHeaders:\n${redactedHeaders}\n\nBody:\n${redactedContent}`
           }]
         };
      } catch (error) {
        const errorMessage = error instanceof Error ? error.message : 'Unknown error';
        const redactedErrorMessage = redactSecretsFromText(errorMessage);
             return {
           content: [{
             type: "text" as const,
             text: `Error making ${method.toUpperCase()} request: ${redactedErrorMessage}`
           }],
           isError: true
         };
      }
    }
  • Zod input schema for the 'http-delete' tool: requires a valid URL, optional headers object.
    inputSchema: {
      url: z.string().url(),
      headers: z.record(z.string()).optional()
    }
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: it makes an HTTP request (implying network I/O and potential side effects), supports secret substitution (a security feature), and specifies the HTTP method (DELETE, which typically implies idempotent deletion). However, it lacks details on error handling, response formats, timeouts, or authentication requirements beyond secrets.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds crucial context about secret substitution. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant information, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (HTTP request with potential side effects), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is moderately complete. It covers the basic operation and secret feature but lacks details on response handling, error cases, or integration with siblings, which could hinder agent effectiveness in complex scenarios.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by explaining that 'url' is the target for the DELETE request and 'headers' are optional and can include secret substitution. This clarifies the purpose of parameters beyond their schema types (string and object), but doesn't detail format constraints or examples for headers.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Make an HTTP DELETE request to a specified URL with optional headers.' This specifies the verb (DELETE), resource (URL), and scope (headers). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the HTTP method, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other HTTP methods like GET or POST.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage context through the mention of 'secret substitution' and HTTP DELETE, suggesting it's for resource deletion operations. However, it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use DELETE versus other HTTP methods (e.g., vs. http-get or http-post) or alternatives like list-secrets, leaving the agent to infer based on HTTP semantics.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related 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/DeanWard/HAL'

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