Skip to main content
Glama
jamesbrink

MCP Server for Coroot

delete_project

Delete a project and all associated data permanently. Provide the project ID to remove the project and its resources.

Instructions

Delete a project and all associated data.

WARNING: This action is irreversible and will delete all project data.

Args: project_id: Project ID

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The implementation function (handler) for the delete_project tool. It calls the client's delete_project method and returns a success response.
    async def delete_project_impl(project_id: str) -> dict[str, Any]:
        """Delete a project."""
        result = await get_client().delete_project(project_id)
        return {
            "success": True,
            "message": f"Project {project_id} deleted successfully",
            "result": result,
        }
  • The @mcp.tool() registration of 'delete_project' as an MCP tool. The docstring serves as the tool's schema/description.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def delete_project(project_id: str) -> dict[str, Any]:
        """Delete a project and all associated data.
    
        WARNING: This action is irreversible and will delete all project data.
    
        Args:
            project_id: Project ID
        """
        return await delete_project_impl(project_id)  # type: ignore[no-any-return]
  • The low-level HTTP client method that performs the actual DELETE request to the Coroot API. Handles various response scenarios (204, empty body, JSON, errors).
    async def delete_project(self, project_id: str) -> dict[str, Any]:
        """Delete a project.
    
        Args:
            project_id: Project ID.
    
        Returns:
            Deletion status.
        """
        response = await self._request("DELETE", f"/api/project/{project_id}")
    
        # Handle empty response (204 or empty body)
        if response.status_code == 204:
            return {"status": "deleted"}
    
        # Try to parse JSON response
        try:
            content = response.text.strip()
            if not content:
                # Empty response body with 200 status
                return {"status": "deleted"}
            data: dict[str, Any] = response.json()
            return data
        except Exception:
            # If parsing fails, assume success if status code is 2xx
            if 200 <= response.status_code < 300:
                return {"status": "deleted"}
            raise
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It warns of irreversibility, which is good, but lacks details about required permissions, impacts on child resources, asynchronous behavior, or confirmation responses.

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 very short and to the point, with an important warning front-loaded. The parameter listing is redundant but not overly verbose. Could be slightly improved by removing the redundant 'Args' line.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's destructive nature, the description should provide more context on prerequisites, error handling, or return values. However, since an output schema exists, the omission of return value details is acceptable. Still, behavioral completeness is moderate.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%. The description merely restates the parameter name and type from the schema ('project_id: Project ID'), adding no additional semantic meaning beyond what the input schema already provides.

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 action (delete) and the resource (project), and specifies that it deletes 'all associated data', which distinguishes it from other delete tools like delete_api_key that delete different resources.

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 includes a warning about irreversibility, implying caution, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_project_settings or other management tools.

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/jamesbrink/mcp-coroot'

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