Skip to main content
Glama
andyfe76

CouchDB MCP Server

by andyfe76

couchdb_delete_database

Remove a CouchDB database by name to manage storage and clean up unused data in your database system.

Instructions

Delete a database

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesName of the database to delete

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the couchdb_delete_database tool logic. It uses the CouchDB server's delete() method and handles ResourceNotFound exceptions.
    async def _delete_database(self, name: str) -> list[TextContent]:
        """Delete a database."""
        try:
            self._get_server().delete(name)
            return [TextContent(type="text", text=f"Database '{name}' deleted successfully")]
        except couchdb.http.ResourceNotFound:
            return [TextContent(type="text", text=f"Database '{name}' not found")]
  • Registration of the couchdb_delete_database tool with its schema definition, including the required 'name' parameter.
    Tool(
        name="couchdb_delete_database",
        description="Delete a database",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "name": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "Name of the database to delete",
                },
            },
            "required": ["name"],
        },
    ),
  • Routing logic that maps the couchdb_delete_database tool name to its handler function, extracting the 'name' argument from the input.
    elif name == "couchdb_delete_database":
        return await self._delete_database(arguments["name"])
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Delete a database' implies a destructive mutation, but it fails to specify critical details: whether deletion is permanent, if it requires admin permissions, what happens to contained documents, or error conditions. This is inadequate for a high-risk operation with zero annotation coverage.

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 at three words, with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place by directly conveying the tool's function without redundancy.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the high complexity of a destructive database deletion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks essential context: behavioral risks, permission requirements, error handling, and what happens post-deletion. For such a critical operation, this minimal description fails to provide adequate guidance for safe and correct usage.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'name' parameter clearly documented as 'Name of the database to delete'. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond this, such as format constraints or examples. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Delete') and the resource ('a database'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'couchdb_delete_document' by specifying the database-level operation. However, it lacks specificity about what 'delete' entails (e.g., permanent removal vs. soft delete), 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., database must exist), consequences (e.g., all documents lost), or sibling tools like 'couchdb_list_databases' for verification. Without such context, an agent might misuse it without understanding the implications.

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/andyfe76/couchdb_mcp'

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