Delete VPS Snapshot
vps_delete_snapshotDelete a VPS snapshot by providing the virtual machine ID to free up storage space.
Instructions
Delete the VPS snapshot.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| vm_id | Yes | Virtual machine ID |
vps_delete_snapshotDelete a VPS snapshot by providing the virtual machine ID to free up storage space.
Delete the VPS snapshot.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| vm_id | Yes | Virtual machine ID |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the annotation already conveys. The destructiveHint=true annotation covers the destructive nature, but the description does not mention irreversibility, recovery options, or any other consequences, offering no added transparency.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single short sentence making it structurally concise, but it essentially repeats the title ("Delete VPS Snapshot") without adding value. It is not wasteful, but it does not earn its place by contributing new information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool this simple (one parameter, no output schema), the description combined with the annotation and schema is minimally adequate. However, it omits any details about side effects (e.g., whether deletion is permanent or if there are restrictions on which snapshots can be deleted), so it is not fully complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema fully describes the only parameter (vm_id with type and description), so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-related information, so it neither enhances nor detracts from the schema's coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific action ("Delete") on a clear resource ("VPS snapshot"), which unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like vps_create_snapshot, vps_get_snapshot, and vps_restore_snapshot.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
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, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It merely restates the operation indicated by the name, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/idugeni/hostinger-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server