Skip to main content
Glama
fettlesh

fettle-mcp

by fettlesh
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Delete a status page incident

delete_status_page_incident
DestructiveIdempotent

Remove an incident and its timeline from a status page to erase mistaken posts. It hides immediately, sends nothing to subscribers, and cannot be restored; resolve real incidents instead.

Instructions

Remove an incident and its timeline from a status page; it stops showing at once, nothing is sent to subscribers, and no tool restores it. Use it for an incident posted by mistake; to close a real one use post_status_page_update with RESOLVED. Requires a key with the write scope. Returns {"success": true}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
page_idYesThe status page's uuid from list_status_pages. An id that is not a status page of this organization is a 404.
incident_idYesThe status page incident's uuid from list_status_page_incidents (not from list_incidents). An unknown id is a 404.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
successYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.6.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / incident_id / description
      Added value: +"The status page incident's uuid from list_status_page_incidents (not from list_incidents). An unknown id is a 404."
    • addedInput schema / properties / page_id / description
      Added value: +"The status page's uuid from list_status_pages. An id that is not a status page of this organization is a 404."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "success": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv0.5.4

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description goes further: it states the effect is immediate, that subscribers are not notified, that it is irreversible ('no tool restores it'), and that a write-scoped key is required. That is exactly the extra context annotations cannot carry.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loads the destructive outcome and the alternative route in three tight clauses with no filler. The closing 'Returns {"success": true}' is redundant given the output schema exists, a small waste.

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, irreversible mutation the description covers effect, notification behavior, reversibility, auth scope, and the correct alternative tool; return values are already covered by the output schema. An agent has everything needed to call it safely.

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% and the schema already explains both page_id and incident_id, including the 404 behavior and which list tool supplies each id. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the 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?

Specific verb (remove) plus resource (status page incident and its timeline), and it explicitly distinguishes itself from create_status_page_incident and update_status_page_incident by describing the delete-only semantics. An agent can identify the right sibling without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit when-to-use ('an incident posted by mistake') and an explicit when-not with the named alternative ('to close a real one use post_status_page_update with RESOLVED'). Nothing is left to inference.

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