Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

gmail.users.labels.delete

Permanently deletes a Gmail label and strips it from every message and thread it's applied to. Use to irreversibly remove labels; the action cannot be undone.

Instructions

Immediately and permanently deletes the specified label and removes it from any messages and threads that it's applied to. For more information, see Manage labels [HTTP DELETE] — removes the resource; irreversible unless the API documents a trash/undo flow; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the post-delete resource state (or empty) as JSON — request bodies are built from the typed parameters (typed flags win over the params map), or read whole from body_file Siblings over the same resource: create, get, list, patch, update.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes[URL path segment] The ID of the label to delete.
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
userIdYes[URL path segment] The user's email address. The special value `me` can be used to indicate the authenticated user.me
dry_runNoReturn the request that would be sent, without sending it.
body_fileNoRead the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"The ID of the label to delete."New value: +"[URL path segment] The ID of the label to delete."
    • addedInput schema / properties / userId / default
      Added value: +"me"
    • changedInput schema / properties / userId / description
      Previous value: -"The user's email address. The special value `me` can be used to indicate the authenticated user."New value: +"[URL path segment] The user's email address. The special value `me` can be used to indicate the authenticated user."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses permanence, immediate irreversibility, cascade removal from messages/threads, refusal under read-only safety profiles, and the returned post-delete state. These are exactly the traits an agent must weigh before calling 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.

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose and consequences are correctly front-loaded in the first sentence, but the boilerplate trailer about request bodies, body_file, and '--readonly safety profiles' is generic template text that is largely irrelevant to a bodiless DELETE and dilutes the signal.

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?

Covers what is destroyed, irreversibility, side effects, and the return value, which is sufficient given no output schema exists. It stops short of permission/scope requirements and the constraint that built-in system labels are not deletable, both of which materially affect a delete call.

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 baseline is 3. The description restates the params-map/body_file precedence but adds nothing about the two required path parameters (id, userId) beyond what the schema already documents, and there is no meaningful body for a DELETE anyway.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Immediately and permanently deletes the specified label') plus the consequential side effect ('removes it from any messages and threads that it's applied to'). This distinguishes it clearly from gmail.users.labels.get/update/patch and from label-removal-on-a-message tools.

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 trailing 'Siblings over the same resource: create, get, list, patch, update' tells the agent which tools share the resource, which implies when this one applies. But there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no note that system labels cannot be deleted, and no pointer to alternatives like messages.modify for removing a label from a message without deleting the label itself.

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