Skip to main content
Glama
code-alchemist01

MCP Cloud Services Server

delete_resource

Remove cloud resources from AWS, Azure, or GCP by specifying the resource ID and type. Requires confirmation to prevent accidental deletion of instances, storage, databases, or functions.

Instructions

Delete a cloud resource (use with caution)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
providerYesCloud provider
resourceIdYesResource ID to delete
resourceTypeYesResource type
confirmYesConfirmation required for deletion

Implementation Reference

  • Core execution logic for the delete_resource tool: validates confirmation flag and returns a placeholder success response for resource deletion.
    case 'delete_resource': {
      const resourceId = params.resourceId as string;
      const confirm = params.confirm as boolean;
    
      if (!confirm) {
        throw new Error('Deletion requires confirmation. Set confirm=true');
      }
    
      // Implementation would go here
      return { success: true, message: `Resource ${resourceId} deletion initiated` };
    }
  • Input validation schema for delete_resource tool, specifying required provider, resourceId, resourceType, and confirmation.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        provider: {
          type: 'string',
          enum: ['aws', 'azure', 'gcp'],
          description: 'Cloud provider',
        },
        resourceId: {
          type: 'string',
          description: 'Resource ID to delete',
        },
        resourceType: {
          type: 'string',
          enum: ['instance', 'storage', 'database', 'function'],
          description: 'Resource type',
        },
        confirm: {
          type: 'boolean',
          description: 'Confirmation required for deletion',
          default: false,
        },
      },
      required: ['provider', 'resourceId', 'resourceType', 'confirm'],
    },
  • Tool registration definition in resourceManagementTools array, including name, description, and full input schema.
    {
      name: 'delete_resource',
      description: 'Delete a cloud resource (use with caution)',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          provider: {
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['aws', 'azure', 'gcp'],
            description: 'Cloud provider',
          },
          resourceId: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Resource ID to delete',
          },
          resourceType: {
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['instance', 'storage', 'database', 'function'],
            description: 'Resource type',
          },
          confirm: {
            type: 'boolean',
            description: 'Confirmation required for deletion',
            default: false,
          },
        },
        required: ['provider', 'resourceId', 'resourceType', 'confirm'],
      },
    },
  • src/server.ts:70-72 (registration)
    MCP server request handler routing: dispatches delete_resource calls (via resourceManagementTools check) to the specific handler function.
    } else if (resourceManagementTools.some((t) => t.name === name)) {
      result = await handleResourceManagementTool(name, args || {});
    } else if (costAnalysisTools.some((t) => t.name === name)) {
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Delete' clearly indicates a destructive operation and 'use with caution' provides some warning, the description lacks critical behavioral details: it doesn't specify whether deletion is permanent/reversible, what permissions are required, whether there are rate limits, or what happens to dependent resources. The confirmation parameter in the schema hints at safety measures, but the description doesn't explain this behavioral aspect.

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 extremely concise at just 6 words, front-loading the core action ('Delete a cloud resource') and following with the cautionary note. Every word serves a purpose with zero redundancy or unnecessary elaboration. The structure moves from action to warning in a logical flow.

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?

For a destructive deletion tool with 4 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what happens after deletion, whether there's confirmation feedback, error conditions, or what the tool returns. The 'use with caution' warning is helpful but doesn't compensate for the lack of behavioral and operational context needed for a safe deletion tool.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, so all parameters are documented in the structured schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema - it doesn't explain how parameters interact, provide examples of resource IDs, or clarify the confirmation workflow. With complete schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't add value beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and resource ('cloud resource'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_resource', 'start_resource', and 'stop_resource' by being the only destructive deletion operation. However, it doesn't specify what constitutes a 'cloud resource' beyond what the parameters indicate.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description includes 'use with caution' which implies this should be used carefully for deletion operations, but doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives. No specific exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, and it doesn't reference sibling tools like 'get_resource' that might be used first to verify what's being deleted.

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/code-alchemist01/Cloud-mcp_server'

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