huly-mcp-selfhost

delete_attachment

Destructive

Permanently delete a file attached to an issue using its attachment ID from list_attachments to remove unwanted or outdated issue files.

Instructions

Permanently delete a file attached to an issue (attachmentId from list_attachments)

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": {
      "workspace": "<workspace>",
      "identifier": "<identifier>",
      "attachmentId": "<attachmentId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_attachment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`workspace`	Yes
`identifier`	Yes	Issue id
`attachmentId`	Yes	Attachment _id from list_attachments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.5.1Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description reinforces that the deletion is permanent (a stronger, non-implied claim than generic destructiveness) but says nothing about authentication needs, recoverability, or side effects on issue content or storage.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and the permanence qualifier, with the id-source hint in a tight parenthetical. No filler, though the parenthetical slightly fragments the single statement.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple three-required-parameter destructive tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the definition covers what an agent needs to call it correctly. Minor gaps (workspace semantics, error behavior for an invalid id) keep it short of full completeness.

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 67%, with identifier and attachmentId documented; workspace is undocumented in both schema and description. The description adds the valuable provenance link for attachmentId (it comes from list_attachments), which is meaning beyond the schema, but leaves workspace semantics unexplained.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Permanently delete a file attached to an issue") and points at the sibling that produces the id, so it is clearly distinct from list_attachments and from comment/document deletion. It is not explicitly contrasted with delete_document or delete_comment, but the resource noun does that work.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The parenthetical "attachmentId from list_attachments" implies the required prerequisite step of listing attachments first, which is useful. There is no explicit guidance on when not to use it, no mention of prerequisites like permissions, and no note about what happens if the id is stale.

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

Deploy Server