Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Grinv

AniList MCP Server

by Grinv
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Remove an entry from your AniList list

remove_list_entry
Destructive

Deletes a list entry from the authenticated user's AniList list using its list-entry ID; requires login and cannot be undone.

Instructions

[Requires login] Delete an entry from the authenticated user's own AniList list by its list-entry ID (NOT the media id) — get it from get_user_list. This cannot be undone, and calling it again on an already-deleted id errors as not found rather than silently succeeding.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
listEntryIdYesThe list ENTRY id to delete (not the media id).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.11.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. 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"
+]
  3. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.7.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / listEntryId / exclusiveMinimum
      Added value: +0
    • removedInput schema / properties / listEntryId / minimum
      Removed value: --2147483648
  4. Addedv0.3.0
  5. Removedv0.3.0
  6. Addedv0.2.0
  7. Removedv0.2.0
  8. First observedv0.1.5

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, it spells out the concrete consequence: irreversible deletion, plus a second call on the same id errors as not found rather than silently succeeding. That is exactly the non-idempotent destructive behavior an agent needs to reason about retries, and the login requirement is stated up front.

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?

One compact sentence front-loads the auth requirement, then the action, then the id caveat, then the irreversibility warning. No filler, and the failure-mode detail is attached to the sentence it qualifies.

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?

With an output schema present, return shape needn't be explained, and annotations carry the safety profile. Auth requirement, id source, irreversibility, and re-call failure behavior are all covered, leaving no meaningful gap for a one-parameter destructive tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the parameter description already says 'ENTRY id, not the media id', so baseline would be 3. The description adds provenance the schema cannot — where to obtain the id (get_user_list) — which materially reduces the risk of passing a media id.

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 an entry from the authenticated user's own list) and explicitly contrasts list-entry ID with media ID, which separates it from add_list_entry/update_list_entry and get_media operations at a glance.

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?

Gives the preconditions (requires login, must be the authenticated user's own entry) and points to get_user_list as the source of a valid id. It stops short of naming the alternative to use when the goal is to change status or score rather than remove the entry (update_list_entry), so routing is clear but not exhaustive.

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