Skip to main content
Glama
Grinv

AniList MCP Server

by Grinv
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Delete a forum thread

delete_thread
Destructive

Delete a forum thread you own on AniList by providing its ID. Requires authentication; action is permanent and cannot be undone.

Instructions

[Requires login] Delete a forum thread the authenticated user owns, by its ID (from search_thread, get_thread, or the id returned by post_thread). This cannot be undone, and calling it again on an already-deleted id errors rather than silently succeeding.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesAniList thread ID to delete.

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. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.7.1
    • 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 destructive and non-idempotent, and the description reinforces and extends this by stating the operation cannot be undone and that repeated calls on a deleted id error rather than silently succeeding. It also adds the authentication and ownership constraints, which are behavioral details not present in 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 dense sentences with no filler; the login requirement is front-loaded and every clause adds information. The description is short but complete.

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 delete operation, the description covers how to obtain the id, the ownership requirement, the irreversibility, and the behavior on repeated calls. An output schema is present, so documenting return values is not required; nothing necessary for correct invocation is missing.

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 single id parameter is fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful provenance for the id (from search_thread, get_thread, or post_thread), helping the agent know exactly where to obtain a valid identifier.

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 action (delete), a specific resource (forum thread), and the ownership restriction (the authenticated user owns it). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_activity and delete_thread_comment without ambiguity.

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 states the login requirement and gives explicit sources for the required id parameter, which tells the agent how to obtain valid inputs. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like delete_thread_comment for thread comments, but the thread/comment distinction and ownership condition make the intended use clear.

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