Skip to main content
Glama

delete_content_type

Remove a content type from the Contentstack MCP server by specifying its unique identifier (UID). Ensures clean content architecture and efficient management.

Instructions

Deletes a content type identified by its UID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uidYesContent type UID to delete

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that performs the DELETE API request to delete the content type by UID from Contentstack and handles success/error responses.
    async ({ uid }) => {
      try {
        const response = await axios.delete(`${API_BASE_URL}/content_types/${uid}`, {
          headers: getHeaders(),
        })
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: `Content type "${uid}" deleted successfully.`,
            },
          ],
        }
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: handleError(error as ApiError),
            },
          ],
          isError: true,
        }
      }
    },
  • Zod input schema defining the 'uid' parameter for the content type to delete.
    {
      uid: z.string().describe('Content type UID to delete'),
    },
  • src/index.ts:546-578 (registration)
    MCP server.tool registration for the delete_content_type tool, including schema and handler.
    server.tool(
      'delete_content_type',
      'Deletes a content type identified by its UID.',
      {
        uid: z.string().describe('Content type UID to delete'),
      },
      async ({ uid }) => {
        try {
          const response = await axios.delete(`${API_BASE_URL}/content_types/${uid}`, {
            headers: getHeaders(),
          })
    
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: 'text',
                text: `Content type "${uid}" deleted successfully.`,
              },
            ],
          }
        } catch (error) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: 'text',
                text: handleError(error as ApiError),
              },
            ],
            isError: true,
          }
        }
      },
    )
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool deletes a content type but lacks critical details: whether deletion is permanent/reversible, permission requirements, impact on associated entries/fields, error handling, or response format. This is inadequate for a destructive operation.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, directly stating the tool's core function without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to address safety concerns, behavioral implications, or result expectations, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand the tool's full context and risks.

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 the 'uid' parameter fully. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., format examples, validation rules). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the action ('Deletes') and target resource ('a content type identified by its UID'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_entry' or 'update_content_type', which would require a 5.

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 like 'update_content_type' or 'delete_entry', nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., content type must exist, no dependencies). It only states what the tool does, not when to invoke it.

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

Related 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/darekrossman/contentstack-mcp'

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