Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
stashcat-api-mcp

stashcat-api-mcp

by dclausen01
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

delete_message

Delete a Stashcat message by providing its ID. This action permanently removes the specified message from the associated conversation.

Instructions

Deletes a message by its ID.

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": {
      "message_id": "<message_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_message"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
message_idYesID of the message to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only states the action. It omits whether deletion is permanent, whether permissions are required, or any side effects. For a destructive tool, 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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the action and object, with zero filler. Highly efficient.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a one-parameter deletion tool with no output schema, the core instruction is present and functional. However, missing warnings about permanence or permissions leaves it slightly incomplete for a destructive operation.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter (message_id) with a clear description. The tool description adds no extra semantic detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Deletes') and names the resource ('message') with scoping ('by its ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_message, like_message, or flag_message.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The usage context is implied: use when a message ID is known and deletion is intended. However, there is no explicit guidance on when NOT to use it or any named alternatives, which would be more helpful.

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