Skip to main content
Glama
RalphLi213
by RalphLi213

delete_summary

Remove a saved chat summary file from your notes directory to manage your organized conversation archives.

Instructions

Delete a chat summary file.

Args: filename: Name of the summary file to delete

Returns: Confirmation message

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filenameYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • main.py:520-547 (handler)
    The handler function for the 'delete_summary' MCP tool. It deletes the specified chat summary markdown file from the NOTES_DIR after verifying it exists and starts with 'chat_summary_'. Uses pathlib for file operations and includes error handling.
    @mcp.tool()
    def delete_summary(filename: str) -> str:
        """
        Delete a chat summary file.
        
        Args:
            filename: Name of the summary file to delete
        
        Returns:
            Confirmation message
        """
        try:
            if not ensure_notes_directory():
                return "Error: Could not access notes directory"
            
            filepath = NOTES_DIR / filename
            
            if not filepath.exists():
                return f"File not found: {filename}"
            
            if not filepath.name.startswith("chat_summary_"):
                return f"Can only delete chat summary files. File must start with 'chat_summary_'"
            
            filepath.unlink()
            return f"Successfully deleted: {filename}"
            
        except Exception as e:
            return f"Error deleting summary: {str(e)}"
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Delete') but doesn't clarify if this is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., affecting other data), or provides error handling. The mention of a 'confirmation message' in returns is helpful but minimal. More behavioral context is needed for a mutation tool.

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 and well-structured: a clear purpose statement followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the main action, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (simple deletion with one parameter), the description covers the basics: purpose, parameter meaning, and return type. However, with no annotations and an output schema (which handles return structure), it lacks behavioral context like permanence or error conditions. For a destructive operation, this is minimally viable but leaves gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds the meaning of 'filename' as 'Name of the summary file to delete', which clarifies the parameter's purpose. However, it doesn't provide format details (e.g., file extension, case sensitivity) or constraints beyond what's implied. Given the single parameter, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 verb ('Delete') and resource ('a chat summary file'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_summaries' and 'summarize_chat' by focusing on deletion rather than listing or creation. However, it doesn't specify whether this is permanent deletion or reversible, which prevents a perfect score.

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 to know the filename from 'list_summaries'), error conditions (e.g., what happens if the file doesn't exist), or when not to use it. The agent must infer usage from the tool name 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/RalphLi213/ide-chat-summarizer-mcp'

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