@proof-holdings/mcp-server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

delete_sub_account

Destructive

Permanently delete a sub-account, revoking its API keys, archiving approval channels, declining pending requests, and retiring its username; the action cannot be undone.

Instructions

Delete a sub-account. Revokes its API keys, archives the approval channels and declines the pending requests created with its own keys, keeps its history but unlinks it, deletes its message templates, and retires its username for good. The last sub-account cannot be deleted; deleting the primary sub-account makes the oldest remaining one primary (the response names it). In a start_login session: one code first — start_2fa_for_action with action_type profile_delete and targets [this sub-account id]. With an API key alone only an EMPTY sub-account (no API keys, approval channels or pending requests) can be deleted; anything else answers owner_session_required. archive_default_linked is deliberately not offered here: archiving or cancelling everything linked only by default is an irreversible fan-out, so archive each item explicitly instead. Cannot be undone.

ACCESS: needs a Proof account. Set PROOF_API_KEY and restart this server, or sign in with start_login — either opens this tool — then call this tool again.

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": {
      "profile_id": "<profile_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_sub_account"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`profile_id`	Yes	Profile ID

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`message`	No
`project`	No
`success`	No	Always `true`. The 1.x Go, PHP and Python SDK types carry it as a string, as released; it is typed boolean in the next major.
`new_primary`	No	Named when the deleted sub-account is (or was) the primary: the OLDEST remaining sub-account takes over, and messages sent without choosing a sub-account carry its name.
`was_primary`	No
`hitl_archived`	No
`hitl_detached`	No
`api_keys_revoked`	No
`circles_detached`	No
`domains_detached`	No
`username_retired`	No	The username is retired for good — it can never be claimed again, by anyone.
`requests_detached`	No
`templates_deleted`	No
`requests_cancelled`	No
`confirmations_denied`	No
`authorizations_revoked`	No
`verifications_detached`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.10.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description goes well beyond that by enumerating the concrete side effects: API keys revoked, approval channels archived, pending requests declined, history kept but unlinked, message templates deleted, username permanently retired. It also discloses irreversibility, the last-sub-account guard, primary reassignment, and the owner_session_required failure mode — none of which are derivable from the annotations.

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 definition is front-loaded with the action, then consequences, then preconditions, which is the right order for a destructive tool. It is dense and somewhat run-on, with mild redundancy between 'irreversible fan-out' and the closing 'Cannot be undone', but nearly every clause carries operational information.

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?

For a destructive, auth-gated mutation with an output schema already covering return values, the description supplies everything an agent needs: side effects, guards, auth paths, the required 2FA step, and the error condition. It even notes that the response names the newly promoted primary, which is the only return detail worth surfacing.

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 100% for the single profile_id parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only marginal meaning by tying the id to the 2FA target list ('targets [this sub-account id]'); it does not otherwise clarify format, sourcing, or lookup behavior for the parameter.

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 opening sentence is a specific verb plus resource ('Delete a sub-account'), and the rest of the definition immediately scopes it to a distinct resource type that is clearly separable from sibling deletion tools such as delete_profile, delete_circle, or delete_template. An agent can identify the operation and its target without opening the schema.

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?

It states explicit preconditions and limits: the last sub-account cannot be deleted, deleting the primary promotes the oldest remaining one, a start_login session requires a code via start_2fa_for_action with action_type profile_delete first, and an API-key-only call works only on an empty sub-account or returns owner_session_required. It also explicitly rules out an alternative ('archive_default_linked is deliberately not offered here... archive each item explicitly instead'), which is exactly the when-not guidance the dimension asks for.

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

Deploy Server