Skip to main content
Glama
fleagne

Backlog MCP Server

by fleagne

backlog_delete_issue

Remove a specific issue by providing its ID or key using the Backlog API. This tool facilitates issue management within projects integrated with the Backlog MCP Server.

Instructions

Delete an issue using the Backlog Issue API.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issueIdOrKeyYesIssue ID or Issue Key

Implementation Reference

  • The primary handler function for the 'backlog_delete_issue' tool. It parses the input arguments using DeleteIssueParamsSchema, calls issueService.deleteIssue with the validated parameters, and formats the response or error.
    const handleDeleteIssue: ToolHandler = async (args) => {
    	try {
    		try {
    			const validatedParams = DeleteIssueParamsSchema.parse(args);
    
    			const text = await issueService.deleteIssue(validatedParams);
    
    			return {
    				content: [
    					{
    						type: "text",
    						text: `Results for your query:\n${text}`,
    					},
    				],
    				isError: false,
    			};
    		} catch (validationError) {
    			throw new ValidationError(
    				`Invalid parameters: ${validationError instanceof Error ? validationError.message : String(validationError)}`,
    			);
    		}
    	} catch (error) {
    		return {
    			content: [
    				{
    					type: "text",
    					text: `Error: ${formatError(error)}`,
    				},
    			],
    			isError: true,
    		};
    	}
    };
  • Registers the 'backlog_delete_issue' tool name to its corresponding handler function handleDeleteIssue within the toolHandlers map.
    export const toolHandlers: Record<ToolName, ToolHandler> = {
    	backlog_get_projects: handleGetProjects,
    	backlog_get_project: handleGetProject,
    	backlog_get_issues: handleGetIssues,
    	backlog_get_issue: handleGetIssue,
    	backlog_add_issue: handleAddIssue,
    	backlog_update_issue: handleUpdateIssue,
    	backlog_delete_issue: handleDeleteIssue,
    	backlog_get_wikis: handleGetWikis,
    	backlog_get_wiki: handleGetWiki,
    	backlog_add_wiki: handleAddWiki,
    	backlog_update_wiki: handleUpdateWiki,
    	backlog_delete_wiki: handleDeleteWiki,
    };
  • Zod schema for input validation of the delete issue tool, requiring the issueIdOrKey.
    export const DeleteIssueParamsSchema = z.object({
    	issueIdOrKey: z.string().describe("Issue ID or Issue Key"),
    });
  • Defines the MCP Tool specification for 'backlog_delete_issue', including name, description, and input schema converted from DeleteIssueParamsSchema.
    export const DELETE_ISSUE_TOOL: Tool = createTool(
    	"backlog_delete_issue",
    	"Delete an issue using the Backlog Issue API.",
    	DeleteIssueParamsSchema,
    );
  • Includes 'backlog_delete_issue' in the ToolName type union for type safety.
    | "backlog_delete_issue"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It omits critical details like irreversibility, permission requirements, and side effects on related data.

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?

Extremely concise at one sentence, but too minimal to be considered well-crafted. It lacks any structural elements that aid quick comprehension beyond the bare minimum.

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 delete operation with no output schema, the description should mention permanence and related context. It is incomplete for safe agentic 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 coverage is 100% with a clear parameter description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 (delete) and resource (issue). It is specific and unambiguous, but lacks differentiation from sibling delete tools like backlog_delete_wiki.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not specify prerequisites, consequences, or exclusion criteria.

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