Skip to main content
Glama

anytype_delete_object

Delete or archive objects in Anytype by specifying space and object IDs to remove unwanted content from your workspace.

Instructions

Elimina (archiva) un objeto

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
space_idYesID del espacio
object_idYesID del objeto

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the tool logic by sending a DELETE request to the Anytype API endpoint to archive/delete the specified object.
    export async function handleDeleteObject(args: any) {
      const { space_id, object_id } = args;
      const response = await makeRequest(`/v1/spaces/${space_id}/objects/${object_id}`, {
        method: 'DELETE',
      });
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(response, null, 2) }] };
    }
  • The input schema definition for the anytype_delete_object tool, specifying required space_id and object_id parameters.
    {
      name: 'anytype_delete_object',
      description: 'Elimina (archiva) un objeto',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          space_id: { type: 'string', description: 'ID del espacio' },
          object_id: { type: 'string', description: 'ID del objeto' },
        },
        required: ['space_id', 'object_id'],
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:132-133 (registration)
    The switch case registration in the MCP server that routes calls to the 'anytype_delete_object' tool to the handleDeleteObject handler.
    case 'anytype_delete_object':
      return await handleDeleteObject(args);
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Elimina (archiva) un objeto' indicates a destructive mutation (delete/archive), but it doesn't clarify if deletion is permanent, reversible, or requires specific permissions. It also omits details like rate limits, error conditions, or what 'archiva' entails versus deletion. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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—a single phrase in Spanish—with zero wasted words. It front-loads the key action ('Elimina') and target ('objeto'), making it easy to scan. Every word earns its place by conveying the core purpose efficiently.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive mutation with 2 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like safety, permissions, or return values, which are critical for a delete operation. While concise, it fails to provide enough context for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear parameter descriptions ('ID del espacio', 'ID del objeto'). The tool description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, as the schema adequately documents parameters without extra help from the description.

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 'Elimina (archiva) un objeto' clearly states the action (delete/archive) and target (object) in Spanish, making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'anytype_update_object' or 'anytype_get_object' by specifying deletion rather than modification or retrieval. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'anytype_delete_property', 'anytype_delete_tag', or 'anytype_delete_type', which target different resources.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing object), exclusions (e.g., not for collections or other resources), or comparisons to siblings like 'anytype_remove_from_collection' for similar actions. Usage is implied only by the name and action, with no explicit context.

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/cryptonahue/mcp-anytype'

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