Webflow MCP Server

collections_items_delete_item

Delete a specific item from a Webflow CMS collection using its ID, with optional locale support for multilingual sites.

Instructions

Delete an item in a CMS collection. Items will only be deleted in the primary locale unless a cmsLocaleId is included in the request.

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": {
      "collection_id": "<collection_id>",
      "itemId": "<itemId>"
    },
    "name": "collections_items_delete_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`itemId`	Yes	Item ID to be deleted.
`cmsLocaleIds`	No	Unique identifier for the locale of the CMS Item.
`collection_id`	Yes	Unique identifier for the Collection.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.7.0Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It reveals an important behavioral trait: deletion only affects the primary locale unless a cmsLocaleId is provided. This is valuable context beyond the basic delete semantics, though it does not mention irreversibility or permission requirements.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no extraneous information. Every word earns its place.

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?

Although there is no output schema or annotations, the description adequately covers the core purpose and the key locale nuance. It could be more complete with details about return values or error behavior, but for a simple delete operation it is largely sufficient.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already provides 100% description coverage for all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the role of cmsLocaleId in targeting a specific locale, which is not fully captured by the schema's generic 'Unique identifier for the locale' text.

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 the action ('Delete an item in a CMS collection') with a specific verb and resource. It is unambiguous and distinguishes itself from sibling tools that handle creation, updating, listing, or publishing items.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The tool's purpose implies when to use it, but it does not explicitly describe when to choose it over alternatives or provide exclusions. The locale caveat adds usage context but does not reference sibling tools.

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