Skip to main content
Glama
beaglesecurity

Beagle Security MCP Server

Official

beagle_delete_project

Remove a security testing project from the Beagle Security platform by specifying its project key.

Instructions

Delete a project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectKeyYesProject key to delete

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function for `beagle_delete_project` tool that performs a DELETE request to the Beagle Security API.
    private async deleteProject(args: any) {
      const result = await this.makeRequest(`/projects?project_key=${args.projectKey}`, {
        method: "DELETE",
      });
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `Project deleted:\n${JSON.stringify(result, null, 2)}`,
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:104-114 (registration)
    Tool registration in the ListToolsRequestSchema handler.
    {
      name: "beagle_delete_project",
      description: "Delete a project",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          projectKey: { type: "string", description: "Project key to delete" },
        },
        required: ["projectKey"],
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:290-291 (registration)
    Tool call routing for `beagle_delete_project` in the CallToolRequestSchema handler.
    case "beagle_delete_project":
      return await this.deleteProject(args);
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but provides minimal behavioral insight. 'Delete' implies a destructive, irreversible action, but it doesn't specify permissions needed, confirmation steps, side effects (e.g., cascading deletion), or error handling. This is inadequate for a mutation tool.

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—just three words—with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded and to the point, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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?

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks critical context like success/error responses, safety warnings, or dependencies, leaving the agent under-informed about the tool's behavior and implications.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the 'projectKey' parameter. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, such as format examples or constraints beyond deletion. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 resource ('a project'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'beagle_delete_application' or 'beagle_modify_project', but it's not vague or tautological.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, irreversible consequences, or when to choose deletion over modification ('beagle_modify_project') or other related operations.

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/beaglesecurity/beagle-security-mcp-server'

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