cognigy-ai-mcp-management-server

delete_function

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a Cognigy.AI function permanently. Validate with dryRun=true before actual deletion to prevent breaking flows.

Instructions

Deletes a Cognigy.AI Function. WARNING: This is destructive. Flows calling this function will fail. MUTATING: Set dryRun=false to delete.

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": {
      "functionId": "<functionId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_function"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`dryRun`	No	If true (default), validates without deleting. Set to false to actually delete.
`functionId`	Yes	The function ID to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.4Jul 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description explicitly states 'WARNING: This is destructive' and 'Flows calling this function will fail', adding behavioral context beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true). It does not address idempotency, but the warning covers the key destructive nature.

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 two sentences plus a fragment, with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, and warnings are placed immediately after.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple delete tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description addresses the key points: action, destructiveness, and dry run parameter. Minor omissions like prerequisites or permission needs are acceptable given the low complexity.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds 'Set dryRun=false to delete', which reinforces the schema's definition of dryRun but does not introduce new meaning or compensate for any gaps.

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 starts with 'Deletes a Cognigy.AI Function', clearly stating the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_function and list_functions by specifying the delete action.

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?

Provides key usage instructions: 'Set dryRun=false to delete' and a warning that 'Flows calling this function will fail', which helps the agent decide when to invoke. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternatives like dry run testing.

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

Deploy Server