Skip to main content
Glama

Delete Group

delete_group
DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a group and remove all of its members. The students stay enrolled in the course and the group category remains. Creating a group again does not restore the same group.

Instructions

Permanently delete a group and remove all of its members. The students stay enrolled in the course and the group category remains. Creating a group again does not restore the same group.

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": {
      "group_id": "<group_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_group"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
group_idYesThe Canvas group ID to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.18.19

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond them: members are removed but stay enrolled in the course, the category survives, and re-creating a group yields a different one. It does not mention required permissions or whether related group discussions/assignments are affected.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the destructive verb, and each sentence conveys a distinct fact (members removed, enrollment preserved, category preserved, no restoration). Zero waste.

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?

For a single-parameter destructive delete with no output schema, the description covers the main thing an agent needs: what is destroyed and what survives. It could go further on prerequisites (permissions, ownership role) and side effects on group-scoped content.

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?

Only one parameter (group_id) with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds no format or sourcing hints for the ID. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Permanently delete a group') with clear scope. It does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings like remove_group_member or delete_appointment_group, but the action itself is unambiguous.

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 explains consequences but gives no guidance on when to use this versus remove_group_member (to remove one student) or other group-related deletion tools. An agent must infer the selection criteria from sibling names alone.

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