Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@argosvix/mcp-server

@argosvix/mcp-server

by argosvix
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

delete_annotation

Delete a specific annotation by its ID. Verify details beforehand to prevent accidental removal.

Instructions

Delete an annotation (DELETE /v1/annotations/:id). No other rows depend on it, so there is no CASCADE impact. To guard against accidental deletion, checking the details with get_annotation first is recommended.

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": {
      "annotationId": "<annotationId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_annotation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
annotationIdYesTarget annotation id (AUTOINCREMENT integer)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.30.0-alpha.14

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses key behaviors: the HTTP DELETE method, no cascading dependencies, and a safety recommendation. It does not mention irreversibility or auth requirements, but for a simple delete operation this is sufficient.

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 concise sentences with no redundant information. Every sentence adds value: the first states the action, the second provides safety context.

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?

The tool has one parameter and no output schema. The description fully covers the purpose, behavior, and a usage recommendation, making it complete for its simplicity.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's description of annotationId as an AUTOINCREMENT integer. No parameter-level details are missing.

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?

Description clearly states 'Delete an annotation' with the HTTP method and resource identifier. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_annotation and update_annotation.

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?

Explicitly states no CASCADE impact and recommends verifying with get_annotation before deletion. Provides clear context for safe usage, though does not explicitly mention when not to use.

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