@hanoak/unsplash-mcp-server

Delete Unsplash Collection

unsplash_delete_collection

Destructive

Delete an Unsplash collection owned by the authenticated user. Use this action to permanently remove a collection from your account; this cannot be undone.

Instructions

Permanently delete a collection owned by the authenticated user. This cannot be undone. Requires OAuth sign-in — run npx @hanoak/unsplash-mcp-server login first. Not read-only.

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": "unsplash_delete_collection"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	The Unsplash collection ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.2.1Aug 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false; the description adds meaningful context on top: the operation is irreversible ('This cannot be undone'), requires prior OAuth authentication, and repeats safety guarantee 'Not read-only.' These statements are consistent with the annotations, so no contradiction. Only failure-mode behavior (401/403/404) is left undisclosed.

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?

Three short sentences and every sentence earns its place: irreversibility and scope up front, the authentication prerequisite, and an explicit disambiguation that this is not read-only. No filler, no restatement of the title.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the essential facts are covered: what is deleted, the ownership constraint, irreversibility, and the login prerequisite. The only missing detail is behavior on failures such as a nonexistent or non-owned collection ID, which is minor for such a simple destructive tool.

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% — the single required `id` parameter is already documented as 'The Unsplash collection ID' in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, and at this coverage level the schema carries the burden, 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?

The description pairs a specific verb ('delete') with a specific resource ('collection owned by the authenticated user') and stresses permanence. This differentiates it from siblings like create_collection and update_collection without ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Clear context is given: the target must be a collection owned by the currently signed-in user, and the exact OAuth prerequisite appears right in the description (`npx @hanoak/unsplash-mcp-server login`). It does not explicitly name exclusion conditions or reasons to prefer another sibling, but for a one-target destructive operation the usage signals are sufficient.

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