nc-mcp-server

delete_user

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently removes a Nextcloud user, including their files and team memberships, requiring admin privileges. Use account disabling instead to block access without deleting data.

Instructions

Permanently delete a Nextcloud user. Requires admin privileges.

This cannot be undone. The user's data and files will be removed. The user also leaves every team, which deletes the teams they own that have no other member (a pending invitation counts as one), with those teams' team folders and their files (Nextcloud 35+ with the Team folders app). To only block access, disable the account with set_user_enabled instead.

Args: user_id: The user ID to delete.

Returns: Confirmation message.

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": {
      "user_id": "<user_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`user_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.7.0Sep 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag this as destructive and idempotent, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: the action cannot be undone, data and files are removed, team memberships are affected, owned teams with no remaining members are deleted along with team folders/files, and version/app dependencies are noted.

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?

The critical warning and admin requirement are front-loaded, and the alternative tool is placed before the docstring-style Args/Returns section. The Returns line is redundant because an output schema exists, and the team-deletion detail is necessarily long but earns its place.

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?

For a destructive admin mutation, the description covers prerequisites, irreversibility, cascading effects, and the main safe alternative. Combined with annotations and the existing output schema, it gives the agent enough information to invoke the tool and understand its impact.

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 0%, and the description only restates 'user_id: The user ID to delete.' It does not clarify how to obtain the ID or whether a username/email is acceptable. For a single simple required parameter this is minimally usable, but it does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: permanently delete a Nextcloud user. It also directly contrasts this with set_user_enabled, so an agent can distinguish destructive account deletion from access blocking without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly states the required admin privilege and names the alternative for the common alternative intent: use set_user_enabled to only block access. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server