Skip to main content
Glama
heresun

OrbStack MCP Server

by heresun

orbstack_machine_delete

Destructive

Permanently delete a specified Linux virtual machine and all its data from OrbStack on macOS. This irreversible action removes the machine completely from the system.

Instructions

删除指定的 Linux 机器。

警告: 此操作不可撤销,机器中的所有数据将被永久删除。

Args: params: 包含机器名称

Returns: str: 删除结果

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The function implementation of orbstack_machine_delete which calls `orb delete -f`.
    async def orbstack_machine_delete(params: MachineNameInput) -> str:
        """删除指定的 Linux 机器。
    
        警告: 此操作不可撤销,机器中的所有数据将被永久删除。
    
        Args:
            params: 包含机器名称
    
        Returns:
            str: 删除结果
        """
        code, stdout, stderr = await _run_orb(["delete", "-f", params.name])
        if code != 0:
            return _format_error(stderr)
        return f"机器 '{params.name}' 已删除"
    
    
    @mcp.tool(
  • Registration of the orbstack_machine_delete tool using the @mcp.tool decorator.
    @mcp.tool(
        name="orbstack_machine_delete",
        annotations={
            "title": "删除 Linux 机器",
            "readOnlyHint": False,
            "destructiveHint": True,
            "idempotentHint": False,
            "openWorldHint": False,
        },
    )
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond what annotations provide. While annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, the description explicitly warns that the operation is irreversible ('不可撤销') and that all data will be permanently deleted ('机器中的所有数据将被永久删除'). This provides crucial safety information that enhances the agent's understanding of the tool's impact.

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?

The description is perfectly structured and front-loaded: it starts with the core purpose, immediately follows with a critical warning, then provides clear Arg/Return sections. Every sentence earns its place - the warning is essential for a destructive operation, and the parameter/return documentation addresses basic usage needs without redundancy.

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 destructive tool with good annotations and an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers the irreversible nature and data loss, which are critical for safe use. The main gap is the lack of explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (like stopping vs deleting), but the warning provides sufficient context for an agent to exercise caution.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage (the schema has no descriptions for the top-level 'params' property), the description compensates by explaining that 'params' should contain the machine name ('包含机器名称'). However, it doesn't specify the exact parameter structure (that 'params' is an object with a 'name' field) or provide format details like the 1-100 character length constraint mentioned in the schema.

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 specific action ('删除' meaning delete) and resource ('指定的 Linux 机器' meaning specified Linux machine). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like orbstack_machine_info, orbstack_machine_list, orbstack_machine_start, and orbstack_machine_stop by specifying a destructive deletion operation.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides implicit guidance through the warning about irreversible deletion, suggesting it should be used cautiously. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like orbstack_machine_stop (for temporary shutdown) or orbstack_machine_remove (if such existed), nor does it mention prerequisites like needing the machine to be stopped first.

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/heresun/orbstack-mcp'

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