Redmine MCP Server

deleteVersion

Delete a Redmine version by providing its ID and response format. Pass versionId and format (json or xml) in pathParams to remove the specified version.

Instructions

Delete version

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": {
      "pathParams": "<pathParams>"
    },
    "name": "deleteVersion"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`pathParams`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.4Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

D1.5/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states 'Delete version', which reveals nothing about irreversibility, permissions, cascading effects, or other important aspects of a destructive operation. This is equivalent to the low-scoring 'process' example.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It omits almost all useful information, so the brevity does not serve the user or agent.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, this description is completely inadequate. It lacks any mention of consequences, error conditions, or related resources, leaving the agent without essential context to invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description says nothing about the parameters. While the schema indicates a 'versionId' and 'format', their meaning and usage are left entirely unexplained. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of semantic context.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Delete version' is a direct restatement of the tool name 'deleteVersion', providing no additional specificity or scope. It is a tautology rather than a clear, informative statement of what the tool does.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, what prerequisites exist, or how it differs from sibling delete tools (e.g., deleteProject, deleteIssue). The description is too sparse to convey any usage context.

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

Deploy Server