Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
sap_analytics_cloud_mcp

sap_analytics_cloud_mcp

by JumenEngels
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

sac_transport_delete_content

Delete a content item from SAP Analytics Cloud by providing its ID and confirming the alteration.

Instructions

Delete a content item.

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": {
      "itemId": "<itemId>"
    },
    "name": "sac_transport_delete_content"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemIdYesContent item ID
allowalterationNoMust be true to execute

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Delete' (destructive action) but fails to mention the critical allowalteration parameter that must be true for execution. This omission could lead to failed invocations. No other behavioral aspects (e.g., idempotency, consequences) are described.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is extremely concise (one sentence), but it omits critical information (e.g., allowalteration). Conciseness should not come at the cost of completeness. It is front-loaded but insufficient.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description must compensate. It does not explain the tool's role in the transport context, the allowalteration safety requirement, or any return behavior. The description is severely incomplete for a delete operation with a safety parameter.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies as the schema already does the work; the description neither improves nor worsens understanding.

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?

The description clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (a content item), which is unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like sac_transport_move_item or sac_transport_get_content_item beyond the verb. A score of 4 reflects clear purpose without explicit sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as other transport tools or delete operations. There are no prerequisites, usage conditions, or exclusions mentioned. The description offers zero context for decision-making.

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