Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Anythink-MCP

Anythink-MCP

Official
by anythink-cloud
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

Delete a project

projects_delete
Destructive

Permanently delete a project and tear down its backend instance, database, and stored data. Confirm first; requires active billing and a specific project id.

Instructions

Permanently delete a project and tear down its backend instance, including its database and stored data. This is destructive and irreversible — always confirm with the user first, and prefer matching by a specific id over a short prefix to avoid removing the wrong project. Requires an active billing account (set one with 'accounts_use'). Returns the deleted project's name and id on success.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesProject to delete — its UUID, name, or a unique prefix. Use a specific id to avoid accidental matches. Find ids via 'projects_list'.
accountIdNoBilling account id the project belongs to. Defaults to the active account set via 'accounts_use'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.2.27
    • removedInput schema / description
      Removed value: -"Permanently delete a project and tear down its backend instance, including its database and stored data. This is destructive and irreversible — always confirm with the user first, and prefer matching by a specific id over a short prefix to avoid removing the wrong project. Requires an active billing account (set one with 'accounts_use'). Returns the deleted project's name and id on success."
    • changedInput schema / properties / accountId / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"projects_delete"
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.2.21
    • changedInput schema / description
      Previous value: -"Delete a project from the billing account"New value: +"Permanently delete a project and tear down its backend instance, including its database and stored data. This is destructive and irreversible — always confirm with the user first, and prefer matching by a specific id over a short prefix to avoid removing the wrong project. Requires an active billing account (set one with 'accounts_use'). Returns the deleted project's name and id on success."
    • changedInput schema / properties / accountId / description
      Previous value: -"Billing account ID (uses active account if omitted)"New value: +"Billing account id the project belongs to. Defaults to the active account set via 'accounts_use'."
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Project ID (UUID or prefix)"New value: +"Project to delete — its UUID, name, or a unique prefix. Use a specific id to avoid accidental matches. Find ids via 'projects_list'."
  3. First observedv0.2.6

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only carry destructiveHint=true; the description adds that the effect is irreversible, what exactly gets destroyed (backend instance, database, stored data), the billing-account prerequisite, and the success return value. This is substantial context beyond the annotation.

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?

Four sentences, each carrying distinct information — effect, warning, prerequisite, return value — with the destructive/irreversible warning front-loaded. No filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description supplies the return value, plus prerequisites, irreversibility, and id-discovery guidance. An agent has everything needed to call this safely.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description ties parameter choice to consequence ('prefer matching by a specific id over a short prefix to avoid removing the wrong project'), giving the id semantics risk-relevant meaning. The accountId default behavior is left to the schema.

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 and resource ('Permanently delete a project') plus the scope of the action ('tear down its backend instance, including its database and stored data'), which clearly separates it from projects_create, projects_list, and projects_use among the 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 says to confirm with the user first, to prefer a specific id over a short prefix, and that an active billing account is required (set via 'accounts_use'). It also points to 'projects_list' as the way to find ids, so prerequisites and alternatives are covered.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools