Skip to main content
Glama

x_api_delete_posts

Delete a specific X post by ID. Permanently removes the tweet using authenticated API credentials, with scoped tenant and user authorization.

Instructions

Delete Post. Use when: Delete Post. Do not use when: a more specific auth/configuration tool is required before the API call or you are only exploring; prefer x_schema_discovery or x_query_suggestion first. Risk: mutating, high-risk. Required permissions and prerequisites: OAuth 2 user token with scopes tweet.read, tweet.write, users.read; OAuth 1a user token Environment-selection behavior: scopeTenantId plus exactly one of scopeUserId or scopeAccountId choose the Vault/Postgres tenant principal used for auth resolution. credentialKey selects a non-default stored credential profile when present. Parameter formats and constraints: id (path, unknown, required). Expected response shape: { ok, status, data: { method, path, url, status, contentType, authType, data } } Common failure conditions: missing scoped credentials in Vault, missing required API parameters, X API auth failures, rate limits, or unsupported multipart/body shape. Recommended prerequisite and follow-up tools: x_connection_info, x_schema_discovery, x_auth_upsert_principal_credentials, x_api_request. Safety warnings: This mutates X state. Validate scope, payload, and authorizationKey before use. Example: {"name":"x_api_delete_posts","arguments":{"scopeTenantId":"default","scopeUserId":"default","id":""}}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
scopeUserIdNo
credentialKeyNo
scopeTenantIdNo
scopeAccountIdNo
authorizationKeyNo
preferredAuthTypeNo
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the mutating risk, safety warnings, required OAuth scopes, environment-selection behavior, and common failure conditions—comprehensive transparency beyond the schema.

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?

The description is lengthy but well-structured with labeled sections, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose. Each section provides operational value, but the overall size is near the upper limit of what is needed.

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?

Given the tool's mutating nature and lack of an output schema, the description is exceptionally complete: it includes expected response shape, common failure conditions, required permissions, environment-selection behavior, a usage example, and safety warnings. No critical aspect is left undocumented.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by explaining the required id parameter as a path parameter and detailing how scopeTenantId, scopeUserId, scopeAccountId, and credentialKey interact. However, it omits explanation for authorizationKey and preferredAuthType, leaving a minor gap.

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?

The description opens with 'Delete Post.' which clearly states the verb and resource. It is unambiguously about deleting a post and distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like create, get, or search post operations.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit 'Use when' and 'Do not use when' sections provide actionable guidance, including when to prefer x_schema_discovery or x_query_suggestion. It also lists recommended prerequisite and follow-up tools, making the decision to use this tool vs alternatives clear.

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/LesterAJohn/X-mcp'

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