Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Sitecore Community MCP

Sitecore Community MCP

by gherisalim
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

item-service-delete-item

Destructive

Delete a Sitecore item by ID, optionally targeting a specific database, language, or version.

Instructions

Delete a Sitecore item 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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "item-service-delete-item"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
optionsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.3

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether the delete is permanent, what happens to versions, or whether the database/language options change scope.

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?

A single tight sentence with the resource and key front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly under-specification rather than true conciseness.

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 mutation with no output schema and zero parameter documentation, the description is too thin. An agent gets no information on permanence, scoping via options, or how this differs from the other delete tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only hints at the required id parameter ('by its ID'). The nested options object (version, database, language) is completely undocumented in both the schema and the description, leaving half the parameter surface unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (Sitecore item) plus the lookup key (by its ID), so the operation is unambiguous. However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from the sibling authoring-delete-item, which appears to serve the same purpose, so an agent cannot tell which one to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites or permissions, and no warning that deletion is permanent. The presence of a similarly named sibling (authoring-delete-item) makes the absence of routing guidance a real gap.

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