Skip to main content
Glama
bigjeager

Bear App MCP Server

by bigjeager

bear_delete_tag

Remove tags from Bear notes to organize content. This tool deletes specified tags to maintain a clean tagging system.

Instructions

Delete an existing tag

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesTag name to delete
show_windowNoShow Bear window

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'bear_delete_tag' tool. It constructs a Bear x-callback URL for the 'delete-tag' action with the provided tag name and optional show_window parameter, executes the URL, and returns a success message.
    private async deleteTag(args: any) {
      const params: Record<string, string | boolean> = { name: args.name };
      
      if (args.show_window) params.show_window = "yes";
    
      const url = this.buildBearURL("delete-tag", params);
      await this.executeURL(url);
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `Deleted tag: ${args.name}`
          }
        ]
      };
    }
  • The input schema definition for the 'bear_delete_tag' tool, specifying required 'name' parameter and optional 'show_window'.
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        name: {
          type: "string",
          description: "Tag name to delete"
        },
        show_window: {
          type: "boolean",
          description: "Show Bear window"
        }
      },
      required: ["name"]
    }
  • src/index.ts:678-695 (registration)
    Registration of the 'bear_delete_tag' tool in the ListTools response, including name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: "bear_delete_tag",
      description: "Delete an existing tag",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          name: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Tag name to delete"
          },
          show_window: {
            type: "boolean",
            description: "Show Bear window"
          }
        },
        required: ["name"]
      }
    }
  • src/index.ts:735-736 (registration)
    Dispatch/registration of the 'bear_delete_tag' handler in the CallToolRequest switch statement.
    case "bear_delete_tag":
      return await this.deleteTag(args);
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 an existing tag' implies a destructive mutation, but it doesn't specify whether deletion is permanent, reversible, or affects associated notes. It also omits details like error handling, permissions, or side effects, leaving significant gaps in behavioral understanding.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Delete an existing tag'), making it immediately scannable. Every word earns its place, achieving optimal conciseness for a simple tool.

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 tool's destructive nature (implied by 'delete'), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address critical context like what happens to notes with the deleted tag, whether deletion is permanent, or what the response contains. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves the agent under-informed about risks and outcomes.

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%, with clear parameter descriptions in the schema (e.g., 'Tag name to delete' for 'name'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. According to rules, baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high (>80%), as the schema adequately documents parameters without description enhancement.

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 'Delete an existing tag' clearly states the verb (delete) and resource (tag), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'bear_rename_tag' (modifies) and 'bear_get_tags' (reads), but doesn't explicitly contrast them. The description is specific but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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., tag must exist), exclusions, or comparisons to siblings like 'bear_rename_tag' or 'bear_trash_note'. The agent must infer usage from the name alone, which is insufficient for optimal tool selection.

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/bigjeager/bear-mcp-server'

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