starlink-enterprise-mcp

delete_user_terminals_by_device_id

Destructive

Remove a user terminal from your Starlink account using its device ID. Ensure the terminal is first removed from service lines.

Instructions

Remove user terminal from account — Required permission: Device management, Edit.User terminal must already be removed from service lines before it can be removed from the account. See /v2/service-lines/{serviceLineNumber}/user-terminals/{deviceId} — [DELETE /public/v2/user-terminals/{deviceId}]

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": {
      "deviceId": "<deviceId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_user_terminals_by_device_id"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`deviceId`	Yes	User terminal ID, kit serial number, or dish serial number.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 13, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint true and readOnlyHint false. The description adds the required permission (Device management, Edit) and the prerequisite workflow, which provides additional behavioral context beyond 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 description is concise, with two sentences and a URL reference. It front-loads the action and permission. Slightly penalized for the URL which may be extraneous, but overall efficient.

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 permission and prerequisite, but does not mention error scenarios (e.g., if still attached to service lines), idempotency, or success response. For a simple deletion with one parameter, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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 100% and the parameter description is clear ('User terminal ID, kit serial number, or dish serial number'). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Remove user terminal from account' – a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_service_line_user_terminal by mentioning the prerequisite of removing from service lines first.

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?

The description specifies required permission and the prerequisite that the user terminal must be removed from service lines first, referencing another endpoint. This provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it could explicitly state 'Use this tool after removing from service lines'.

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

Deploy Server