Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

delete_feature

Destructive

Remove a feature from a 3D design by retiring it (default, recoverable) or erasing it permanently. Use it to clean up design history in Kiln while keeping a rollback option.

Instructions

Delete a feature — retire it (default, recoverable) or erase it permanently.

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": {
      "feature_id": "<feature_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_feature"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoEcho ``feature_id`` here to execute. Omit on the first call to see the confirmation prompt. Default: "".
permanentNo``False`` (default) retires; ``True`` erases. Default: false.
feature_idYesThe feature to delete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"\"."New value: +"Echo ``feature_id`` here to execute. Omit on the first call to see the confirmation prompt. Default: \"\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / feature_id / description
      Added value: +"The feature to delete."
    • changedInput schema / properties / permanent / description
      Previous value: -"Default: false."New value: +"``False`` (default) retires; ``True`` erases. Default: false."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing that the default path is recoverable and only the permanent flag makes erasure irreversible — the single most important behavioural fact for this tool. It omits cascade effects (what happens to branches/releases of the feature) and does not mention the two-step confirm flow, though that is documented in the schema.

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?

A single sentence with zero padding, front-loading the verb and resource before the mode split. Every clause earns its place.

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 3-parameter tool with full schema coverage, no output schema, and clear destructive annotations, the description supplies the critical recoverability distinction. Only minor gaps remain — no statement of downstream impact on feature branches/releases and no mention that a confirmation round-trip is required before execution.

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%, so feature_id, permanent, and the confirm echo are all already documented in structured fields. The description's parenthetical "(default, recoverable)" restates the permanent=false semantics rather than extending them. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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?

Specific verb+resource ("Delete a feature") with both operational modes named: retire vs. permanent erase. It is clearly a feature-lifecycle operation, though it never explicitly separates itself from near-neighbours like archive_feature or retire_feature_branch, leaving the agent to infer the distinction from the name.

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 implies when each mode applies (default = recoverable retire, explicit = permanent erase), which is genuinely useful routing information. But it gives no guidance on when to prefer this over archive_feature or the retire_* siblings, and no prerequisites or caution about choosing the destructive path.

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