tailscale-blade-mcp

ts_delete_device

Remove a device from your Tailscale tailnet by providing its device ID and setting confirm to true. Requires write permissions enabled.

Instructions

Delete a device from the tailnet. Requires TAILSCALE_WRITE_ENABLED=true and confirm=true.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "device_id": "<device_id>"
    },
    "name": "ts_delete_device"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`device_id`	Yes	Device nodeId (from ts_devices)
`confirm`	No	Must be true to confirm — removes device from tailnet

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.9.0Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the env var requirement and confirm Boolean, but lacks details on irreversibility, side effects, or error scenarios. Adds basic transparency but could be richer.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One efficient sentence that front-loads the action and includes key requirements. No unnecessary words, but could be expanded slightly without sacrificing conciseness.

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 presence of an output schema and 2 parameters, the description covers core aspects (action, prerequisites) but lacks mention of permanence of deletion, error handling, or recovery options. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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%, but the description adds value by specifying the TAILSCALE_WRITE_ENABLED requirement, which is not in the schema. It reinforces the confirm parameter's necessity, though device_id meaning is adequately covered by 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?

Clearly states the action: 'Delete a device from the tailnet.' Verb and resource are specific, and it differentiates from sibling tools like ts_authorize_device and ts_expire_device.

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?

Explicitly states prerequisites: 'Requires TAILSCALE_WRITE_ENABLED=true and confirm=true.' This guides the agent on when and how to invoke the tool. However, it does not mention alternatives or exclusions, like the permanent nature compared to expiration.

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