Plane MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Delete Work Item

delete_work_item

Permanently remove a work item from a Plane project. This action is irreversible, so ensure you intend to delete rather than cancel.

Instructions

Permanently delete a work item. This cannot be undone.

Prefer update_work_item with a "Cancelled" state when you only mean to close the item.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`project_id`	Yes	Project UUID.
`work_item_id`	Yes	Work item UUID.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.1Sep 26, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / project_id / description
```
Added value: +"Project UUID."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / work_item_id / description
```
Added value: +"Work item UUID."
```
First observedv0.1.0Sep 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states the operation is permanent and cannot be undone. It could go further by mentioning cascading effects or permission needs, but the key destructive trait is well covered.

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 short sentences: the first front-loads the most important behavioral fact (permanent, irreversible), and the second provides the key alternative. No wasted words.

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 low-complexity tool with only two required parameters and an output schema present, the description includes all necessary selection and invocation context: destructive semantics, irreversibility, and the alternative for closing items.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% and already describes both parameters as UUIDs. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, which is acceptable because the schema handles it. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('work item'), and clearly indicates the destructive, permanent nature. It also implies the difference from update_work_item by mentioning the alternative, making it easy to distinguish from siblings.

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?

Explicitly tells when not to use this tool: when the intent is to close a work item, and names the alternative tool (update_work_item) and the preferred state ('Cancelled'). This is direct, actionable routing guidance.

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