@datafast/mcp-server

Delete Goal Events

delete_goals

Delete goal events from your analytics using date range, visitor ID, or goal name filters. At least one filter is required.

Instructions

Delete goal events. Filter by date range, visitor ID, or goal name. At least one filter must be provided.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "delete_goals"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Filter by goal name
`endAt`	No	End date in ISO 8601 format
`startAt`	No	Start date in ISO 8601 format
`datafast_visitor_id`	No	Filter by visitor ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the filter constraint but fails to state that deletion is permanent, whether it can be undone, or any side effects. For a destructive tool, this is a significant gap.

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 concise sentences front-load the action and immediately provide the critical usage constraint. No wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers the basic operation and filter requirement, but with no output schema and no annotations, it omits consequences (permanence) and return value expectations, leaving the tool only minimally complete.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds meaningful constraint semantics by summarizing the filter dimensions and explicitly requiring at least one filter—information not present in the schema's optional field definitions.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('goal events'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like track_goal (creation) and get_goals (retrieval).

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?

It provides clear usage context by listing acceptable filters and the requirement that at least one filter must be provided. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or contrast it with delete_payments.

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