Skip to main content
Glama
Grinv

AniList MCP Server

by Grinv
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Delete an activity post

delete_activity
Destructive

Delete an AniList activity post you own. Requires login and cannot be undone.

Instructions

[Requires login] Delete an activity post the authenticated user owns. This cannot be undone, and calling it again on an already-deleted id errors rather than silently succeeding.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesAniList activity ID to delete — from get_user_activity, get_user_recent_activity, search_activity, or the id returned by a previous post_text_activity/post_message_activity call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.9.0
    • removedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / deleted / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "boolean"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / deleted / type
      Added value: +[
+  "boolean",
+  "null"
+]
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.7.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"AniList activity ID to delete — from get_user_activity, search_activity, or the id returned by a previous post_text_activity/post_message_activity call."New value: +"AniList activity ID to delete — from get_user_activity, get_user_recent_activity, search_activity, or the id returned by a previous post_text_activity/post_message_activity call."
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / exclusiveMinimum
      Added value: +0
    • removedInput schema / properties / id / minimum
      Removed value: --2147483648
  3. Addedv0.3.0
  4. Removedv0.2.0
  5. First observedv0.1.5

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description goes beyond by warning that deletion 'cannot be undone' and that calling again on an already-deleted id 'errors rather than silently succeeding.' It also discloses the login and ownership requirements, adding meaningful behavioral context not present in the annotations.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with no filler. The most important constraints (login, ownership, irreversibility) are front-loaded, and the non-idempotency behavior is stated in the second sentence. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a single-parameter destructive action with a rich schema and output schema present, this description is complete. It covers authentication, authorization scope, permanence, and error behavior, leaving no critical gap for an agent deciding whether to call and what to expect.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage and describes the id parameter thoroughly, including valid sources. The tool description adds extra semantic value by stating the id must belong to an activity the authenticated user owns, which constrains which ids are valid and is not explicitly in the schema's id description.

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 description names a specific verb ('Delete'), a specific resource ('activity post'), and adds the crucial scope constraint ('the authenticated user owns'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling delete tools like delete_thread and delete_thread_comment without needing to inspect their schemas.

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?

It clearly communicates that the tool requires login and can only be used on activities owned by the authenticated user, which defines the applicable usage context. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the resource-specific wording makes the intended use obvious given the sibling names.

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