Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mailchimp MCP

Mailchimp MCP

by damientilman
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

delete_store_product_variant

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently remove a specific variant from a product in an e-commerce store. Requires store, product, and variant IDs.

Instructions

Permanently delete a single variant from a product in a store.

This cannot be undone. A product must retain at least one variant, so deleting its last variant may be rejected by the API.

Args: store_id: E-commerce store ID. product_id: Product ID that owns the variant. variant_id: Variant ID to delete.

Returns: JSON confirming deletion (empty body on success).

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": {
      "store_id": "<store_id>",
      "product_id": "<product_id>",
      "variant_id": "<variant_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_store_product_variant"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNo
store_idYes
product_idYes
variant_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.7.1

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations include destructiveHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds valuable context: 'This cannot be undone' and the last variant constraint. These details go beyond the annotations, though some aspects like error handling or permissions are not covered.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the purpose, followed by key constraints, then parameter listings. It is concise and well-structured, though the Args/Returns section adds some redundancy that could be streamlined.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature and four parameters, the description covers purpose, constraints, parameter roles, and return format. It lacks some details on error states (beyond last variant) and prerequisites, but is mostly complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description explains three of four parameters (store_id, product_id, variant_id) with brief descriptions. However, the optional 'account' parameter is ignored entirely, leaving it undocumented.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states 'Permanently delete a single variant from a product in a store', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling delete tools like delete_store_product by targeting variants specifically.

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?

The description provides a clear condition: 'A product must retain at least one variant, so deleting its last variant may be rejected by the API.' This gives context on when not to use the tool, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like updating a variant's status.

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