Skip to main content
Glama

backlog_delete

Permanently remove a task from the backlog by specifying its ID to manage task completion and maintain an organized workflow.

Instructions

Delete an item permanently.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTask ID to delete

Implementation Reference

  • Main handler implementation for backlog_delete tool. Registers the tool with the MCP server, defines the input schema (requiring an 'id' string parameter), and executes the delete operation by calling storage.delete(id) and returning a confirmation message.
    export function registerBacklogDeleteTool(server: McpServer) {
      server.registerTool(
        'backlog_delete',
        {
          description: 'Delete an item permanently.',
          inputSchema: z.object({
            id: z.string().describe('Task ID to delete'),
          }),
        },
        async ({ id }) => {
          storage.delete(id);
          return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Deleted ${id}` }] };
        }
      );
    }
  • Registration of backlog_delete tool. Imports registerBacklogDeleteTool and calls it within the registerTools function to make the tool available on the MCP server.
    import { registerBacklogDeleteTool } from './backlog-delete.js';
    import { registerBacklogSearchTool } from './backlog-search.js';
    import { registerBacklogContextTool } from './backlog-context.js';
    
    export function registerTools(server: McpServer) {
      registerBacklogListTool(server);
      registerBacklogGetTool(server);
      registerBacklogCreateTool(server);
      registerBacklogUpdateTool(server);
      registerBacklogDeleteTool(server);
  • Storage delete implementation. The delete method performs the actual deletion from TaskStorage and removes the document from the search index if search is ready. Returns a boolean indicating success.
    delete(id: string): boolean {
      const deleted = this.taskStorage.delete(id);
      if (deleted && this.searchReady) this.search.removeDocument(id);
      return deleted;
    }
  • Type definition for backlog_delete as part of the ToolName union type, which includes all write tools (backlog_create, backlog_update, backlog_delete, write_resource).
    export type ToolName = 'backlog_create' | 'backlog_update' | 'backlog_delete' | 'write_resource';
  • Middleware event mapping for backlog_delete. Maps the tool to the 'task_deleted' event type, which is emitted via the event bus when the tool executes to notify subscribers of the deletion.
    const TOOL_EVENT_MAP: Record<ToolName, BacklogEventType> = {
      backlog_create: 'task_created',
      backlog_update: 'task_changed',
      backlog_delete: 'task_deleted',
      write_resource: 'resource_changed',
    };
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'permanently,' which implies irreversibility, but doesn't cover other critical aspects like required permissions, error handling (e.g., if ID doesn't exist), or side effects (e.g., impact on related data). For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Delete'), making it easy to scan. However, it could be slightly more specific (e.g., 'Delete a backlog task permanently') to enhance clarity without sacrificing brevity.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature, lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what happens on success or failure, return values, or safety considerations. For a mutation tool with no structured safety hints, the description should provide more context to guide safe usage.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the 'id' parameter documented as 'Task ID to delete.' The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema adequately documents the parameter without needing extra details from the description.

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 ('an item'), though it doesn't specify what type of item (e.g., task, backlog item) beyond what the parameter schema implies. It distinguishes from siblings like 'backlog_create' and 'backlog_update' by indicating deletion rather than creation or modification, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other destructive operations.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., item must exist), when not to use it (e.g., for soft deletion), or refer to sibling tools like 'backlog_update' for modifications instead of deletion. The agent must infer usage from the name and context alone.

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/gkoreli/backlog-mcp'

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