Skip to main content
Glama

pylon_delete_tag

Remove tags from the Pylon customer support platform by specifying the tag ID to delete.

Instructions

Delete a tag

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe tag ID to delete

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:567-579 (registration)
    Registration of the 'pylon_delete_tag' MCP tool, including Zod input schema validation and a thin handler function that delegates to PylonClient.deleteTag and formats the response.
    server.tool(
    	'pylon_delete_tag',
    	'Delete a tag',
    	{
    		id: z.string().describe('The tag ID to delete'),
    	},
    	async ({ id }) => {
    		const result = await client.deleteTag(id);
    		return {
    			content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }],
    		};
    	},
    );
  • Core implementation of the deleteTag method in PylonClient class, which performs a DELETE HTTP request to the Pylon API endpoint `/tags/${id}` using the private request method.
    async deleteTag(id: string): Promise<SingleResponse<{ success: boolean }>> {
    	return this.request<SingleResponse<{ success: boolean }>>(
    		'DELETE',
    		`/tags/${id}`,
    	);
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the structure of a Tag object used throughout the codebase.
    export interface Tag {
    	id: string;
    	value: string;
    	object_type: 'account' | 'issue' | 'contact';
    	hex_color?: string;
    }
  • Zod schema for input validation of the tool, requiring a string 'id' parameter.
    {
    	id: z.string().describe('The tag ID to delete'),
    },
  • MCP tool handler function that calls the client method and returns a formatted text response.
    async ({ id }) => {
    	const result = await client.deleteTag(id);
    	return {
    		content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }],
    	};
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Delete a tag' implies a destructive mutation, but it doesn't specify whether this action is reversible, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., on associated issues), or provides confirmation feedback. This is inadequate for a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage.

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?

The description is extremely concise ('Delete a tag') with no wasted words, making it front-loaded and easy to parse. Every word earns its place by directly conveying the core action and resource.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's destructive nature, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It should address behavioral aspects like irreversibility, permissions, or error handling to help the agent use it safely and effectively, but it provides only minimal information.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage (the 'id' parameter is documented as 'The tag ID to delete'), so the description doesn't need to add parameter details. With zero parameters mentioned in the description, it avoids redundancy, and the schema fully handles semantics, earning a baseline score above minimum viable.

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 'Delete a tag' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (tag), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like pylon_delete_account or pylon_delete_contact, which follow the same pattern for different resources, so it lacks 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing tag ID), exclusions, or related tools like pylon_update_tag or pylon_get_tag for reference, leaving the agent to infer usage from context alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/JustinBeckwith/pylon-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server