Skip to main content
Glama
bim-ba

ycli

by bim-ba
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Delete Forms question

forms_questions_delete
Destructive

Deletes a question from a form by survey and question ID; if a display condition references it, the request is refused, so remove that condition first.

Instructions

Delete a question from a form; one that a display condition refers to is refused.

Delete the condition first (conditions_question_delete).

The API answers 204 No Content; the returned record confirms the accepted action.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoIgnored by the API: a question that a display condition refers to is refused all the same.
survey_idYesForm id (hex ObjectId) the question belongs to.
question_idYesQuestion id (integer) to delete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.122.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / force / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / force / default
      Previous value: -falseNew value: +null
    • removedInput schema / properties / force / type
      Removed value: -"boolean"
  2. First observedv0.67.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, yet the description adds meaningful behavior: conditioned questions are refused regardless of the force flag, and the prerequisite ordering. The closing claim that 'the returned record confirms the accepted action' sits awkwardly next to 'the API answers 204 No Content', which is mildly confusing rather than contradictory with the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and the refusal rule, with no filler. The final sentence about the response is the least informative part and slightly muddles the message.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With annotations carrying the safety profile and no output schema to explain, the description covers the key failure mode and the required ordering well. It omits any mention of permission requirements for a destructive operation, and its response-code sentence is internally inconsistent.

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%, and the schema already documents survey_id, question_id and that force is ignored by the API. The description adds no parameter syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Delete a question from a form') and adds the scope-defining constraint that conditioned questions are refused, which no sibling delete tool shares. An agent can identify exactly what this does without opening the schema.

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?

It gives explicit when-not guidance (refused if a display condition references the question) and routes to the prerequisite tool by name. The named target is the condition-delete prerequisite rather than a same-goal alternative, and the referenced name (``conditions_question_delete``) doesn't exactly match the sibling ``forms_conditions_question_delete``, but the routing is clear.

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