Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
HacknPlan MCP

HacknPlan MCP

by jompereira
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

delete_project_role

Removes a specified role from a project, streamlining role management by deleting roles no longer needed.

Instructions

Delete a project role

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "roleId": "<roleId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_project_role"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
roleIdYes
projectIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.1/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description provides no behavioral context beyond the action. It does not disclose whether the deletion is irreversible, what happens to users assigned the role, or any cascading effects. With no annotations to supplement, the agent lacks critical safety information.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, overly sparse sentence. While concise, it sacrifices essential information; it does not earn its place by adding value beyond the tool name. A better description would include key details in a structured format.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the absence of an output schema and the critical nature of a deletion operation, the description is woefully incomplete. It fails to explain parameter semantics, behavioral effects, or error conditions, making it insufficient for safe and correct tool invocation.

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?

The input schema has two required parameters (roleId, projectId) with 0% description coverage in the schema. The tool description does not explain what these parameters represent or how to obtain their values, leaving the agent without guidance on correct usage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Delete a project role' clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (project role), which aligns with the tool name and distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_project_role or get_project_role. However, it lacks additional specificity about what exactly a 'project role' entails.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives like replace_project_role or update_project_role, nor does it mention prerequisites such as required permissions or dependencies (e.g., if the role is currently assigned).

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools