@growi/mcp-server

Official

by growilabs

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

deleteShareLinkById

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a specific share link from GROWI by providing its unique ID. Helps manage access by revoking shared links.

Instructions

Delete a specific share link by ID in GROWI

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": "deleteShareLinkById"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Share link ID to delete
`appName`	No	GROWI app name to operate on (optional, uses default if not specified)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.1May 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds the 'by ID' specificity but does not elaborate on behavioral traits beyond what annotations convey.

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?

A single, concise sentence conveys the essential purpose without any fluff. It is front-loaded and immediately understandable.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter tool with comprehensive annotations and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It explains the action and resource clearly, though it could be improved by noting idempotency or error handling.

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%, and the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Delete', the resource 'share link', and the specificity 'by ID', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'deleteShareLinks' that likely handle batch deletion.

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 like 'deleteShareLinks' or 'createShareLink'. The description does not mention prerequisites, side effects, or context for use.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.