Skip to main content
Glama
esignaturescom

MCP Server for eSignatures

delete_template

Remove contract templates from the eSignatures system to manage your template library and maintain organized workflows.

Instructions

Deletes a contract template.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
template_idYesGUID of the template to be deleted.

Implementation Reference

  • Handler logic for the 'delete_template' tool: sends a POST request to the eSignatures API endpoint to delete the specified template.
    if name == "delete_template":
        response = await httpxClient.post(f"/api/templates/{arguments.get('template_id')}/delete?token={secret_token}")
        return [types.TextContent(type="text", text=f"Response code: {response.status_code}, response: {response.json()}")]
  • Pydantic/JSON schema defining the input parameters for the 'delete_template' tool, requiring 'template_id'.
    INPUT_SCHEMA_DELETE_TEMPLATE = {
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {
            "template_id": {"type": "string", "description": "GUID of the template to be deleted."},
        },
        "required": ["template_id"],
    }
  • Registration of the 'delete_template' tool in the MCP server's list_tools() method, specifying name, description, and input schema.
    types.Tool(
        name="delete_template",
        description="Deletes a contract template.",
        inputSchema=INPUT_SCHEMA_DELETE_TEMPLATE
    ),
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action is a deletion but doesn't cover critical aspects like whether it's irreversible, requires specific permissions, affects related data, or has rate limits. This leaves significant gaps 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 that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 insufficient. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., irreversibility, permissions), output format, or error handling, leaving the agent with incomplete context for safe and effective use.

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%, with the parameter 'template_id' documented as a 'GUID of the template to be deleted'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating value.

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 resource ('a contract template'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_contract' or 'remove_template_collaborator', which prevents a perfect score.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_contract' or 'remove_template_collaborator'. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., whether the template must be unused) or exclusions, offering minimal usage direction.

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

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/esignaturescom/mcp-server-esignatures'

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