DocsMint

permanently_delete_document

Destructive

Permanently purge a trashed document and its version history only after verifying it in the trash and receiving explicit user confirmation.

Instructions

Irreversibly purge a document already in trash, including its version history. Use only on an explicit user request after checking list_trash.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	UUID returned by the corresponding list or read operation.
`workspaceId`	No	Workspace UUID from list_workspace_structure(kind=workspaces). Required for ambiguous creates and structure changes; omit to search all granted scopes.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`deleted`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.4Oct 27, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / workspaceId

Added value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "description": "Workspace UUID from list_workspace_structure(kind=workspaces). Required for ambiguous creates and structure changes; omit to search all granted scopes.",
+  "format": "uuid",
+  "pattern": "^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.2Sep 28, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

changedInput schema / properties / id / description

Previous value: -"UUID of the target object, obtained from the corresponding list tool."New value: +"UUID returned by the corresponding list or read operation."

Addedv0.1.1Sep 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, but the description adds the details an agent actually needs before firing: the operation is irreversible and it destroys version history, and the target must already be in trash. That is exactly the 'what gets destroyed' context the annotations cannot express.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the irreversible consequence front-loaded ahead of the usage restriction. Every clause carries decision-relevant information.

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 destructive single-target purge with full schema coverage, an output schema, and complete annotations, nothing material is missing: what it does, what is lost, what precondition must hold, and what to check first are all stated.

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 coverage is 100%, with the id parameter documented as a UUID from a list/read operation and workspaceId explained as optional scope. The description adds no further syntax or format detail, so the documented baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('irreversibly purge a document') plus a narrowing precondition ('already in trash, including its version history') that separates it from sibling soft-delete tools like delete_document. An agent can pick this over delete_document or restore_trashed_document without opening any schema.

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 a hard usage gate ('use only on an explicit user request') and a concrete prerequisite ('after checking list_trash'), which is real routing guidance. It stops short of naming the alternatives for the non-trashed case (delete_document) or the undo path (restore_trashed_document), so the when-not side is only implied.

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