Skip to main content
Glama
dappros

Ethora MCP Server

by dappros
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Delete Chat Room

ethora-app-delete-chat
DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a chat room you own, wiping its message archive and member affiliations. Use when a room must be removed with no recovery.

Instructions

Permanently delete a chat room from an app the caller owns — removes the MUC room, its message archive, and all member affiliations. Irreversible; gated behind ETHORA_MCP_ENABLE_DANGEROUS_TOOLS=true. Requires: a room from ethora-app-get-default-rooms or ethora-app-create-chat. Auth: user-auth mode, active session; the caller must own the app. Errors: 401 not logged in; 403 not owner; 404 chatJid not a room in the app.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appIdNo24-char hex ObjectId of the app the chat room belongs to. Optional — defaults to the app most recently passed to `ethora-app-select`.
chatJidYesRoom JID (XMPP address) of the chat to delete, e.g. `<roomId>@conference.<host>`. Obtain from `ethora-app-get-default-rooms` or the response of `ethora-app-create-chat`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv26.9.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / appId / description
      Previous value: -"appId for app"New value: +"24-char hex ObjectId of the app the chat room belongs to. Optional — defaults to the app most recently passed to `ethora-app-select`."
    • changedInput schema / properties / chatJid / description
      Previous value: -"title for chat"New value: +"Room JID (XMPP address) of the chat to delete, e.g. `<roomId>@conference.<host>`. Obtain from `ethora-app-get-default-rooms` or the response of `ethora-app-create-chat`."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "appId",
-  "chatJid"
-]New value: +[
+  "chatJid"
+]
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description provides rich behavioral context: permanent deletion, removal of the message archive, revocation of member affiliations, irreversibility, environment-flag gating, and specific 401/403/404 error conditions. This significantly outstrips what annotations alone convey.

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 compact, front-loads the critical destructive and irreversible nature, and then systematically covers requirements, auth, and errors. Every sentence adds necessary operational information with no padding.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a destructive mutation with no output schema, the description is complete: it covers scope, side effects, prerequisites, auth, ownership, gating, and error codes. Nothing an agent needs to safely and correctly invoke this tool is missing.

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 the schema already documents both parameters well. The description reinforces how to obtain chatJid and mentions ownership constraints, but adds no new parameter-level formats or semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Permanently delete a chat room') and resource ('chat room from an app the caller owns'), and enumerates the concrete consequences: removes the MUC room, message archive, and member affiliations. It also distinguishes this from related tools like ethora-app-delete and ethora-app-create-chat by focusing on chat-room deletion scope.

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 gives clear prerequisites (a room from ethora-app-get-default-rooms or ethora-app-create-chat), auth requirements (user-auth mode, active session, ownership), and the gating condition (ETHORA_MCP_ENABLE_DANGEROUS_TOOLS=true). It does not explicitly contrast with alternative deletion tools, but the scope and prerequisites make usage conditions clear.

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