Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-synology

mcp-synology

by cmeans
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

delete_download

Destructive

Deletes one or more download tasks by ID on a Synology NAS. Finished files are kept, but unfinished partial data is discarded irreversibly, so confirm tasks before deleting.

Instructions

Remove one or more download tasks. A deleted task can't be restored (its source URL is gone with it), so name the tasks and confirm with the user before deleting. Files from finished tasks are always kept. For unfinished tasks the partial data is discarded (irreversible); don't rely on force_complete to keep it.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idsYesIDs of the tasks to remove, from list_downloads.
force_completeNoAsk DSM to keep an unfinished task's partial file instead of discarding it (DSM may discard it anyway). Leave false (default) for finished tasks: DSM refuses them with it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.9.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / force_complete / description
      Added value: +"Ask DSM to keep an unfinished task's partial file instead of discarding it (DSM may discard it anyway). Leave false (default) for finished tasks: DSM refuses them with it."
    • addedInput schema / properties / task_ids / description
      Added value: +"IDs of the tasks to remove, from list_downloads."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "tool_delete_downloadOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Addedv0.7.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations mark it destructive, and the description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond that: source URLs are lost, finished task files are retained, unfinished partial data is discarded irreversibly, and force_complete should not be relied on. This is exactly the kind of destructive-operation disclosure an agent needs.

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 tightly written sentences, with the core action front-loaded and the irreversible consequences and confirmation requirement following immediately. No filler.

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, parameter-light tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential risk profile, file-retention behavior, confirmation requirement, and force_complete caveat. Nothing needed to call it safely appears missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so task_ids and force_complete are already documented in the input schema. The description reinforces the force_complete caveat but does not add much semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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: removing download tasks. It also clarifies that finished task files are kept, which helps distinguish it from a file-deletion sibling, but it does not explicitly name alternatives such as delete_files or pause_download.

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?

Gives clear usage context: deletion is permanent and requires naming tasks and confirming with the user before proceeding. It does not explicitly compare when to use this instead of pausing, editing, or deleting files, so it falls short of full alternatives guidance.

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