Skip to main content
Glama

delete-shape-item

Remove a specific shape from a Miro board by providing the board ID and shape ID to clean up visual elements.

Instructions

Delete a specific shape item from a Miro board

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
boardIdYesUnique identifier (ID) of the board that contains the shape
itemIdYesUnique identifier (ID) of the shape that you want to delete

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'delete-shape-item' tool. It validates the boardId and itemId inputs, calls the MiroClient API to delete the shape item, and returns a success or error response.
    fn: async ({ boardId, itemId }) => {
      try {
        if (!boardId) {
          return ServerResponse.error("Board ID is required");
        }
    
        if (!itemId) {
          return ServerResponse.error("Item ID is required");
        }
    
        await MiroClient.getApi().deleteShapeItem(boardId, itemId);
        return ServerResponse.text(JSON.stringify({ success: true, message: "Shape deleted successfully" }, null, 2));
      } catch (error) {
        return ServerResponse.error(error);
      }
    }
  • Zod schema defining the input parameters for the tool: boardId (string) and itemId (string).
    args: {
      boardId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the board that contains the shape"),
      itemId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the shape that you want to delete")
    },
  • src/index.ts:160-160 (registration)
    Registers the deleteShapeItemTool with the ToolBootstrapper instance, making the tool available in the MCP server.
    .register(deleteShapeItemTool)
  • src/index.ts:60-60 (registration)
    Imports the deleteShapeItemTool definition from its module for use in registration.
    import deleteShapeItemTool from './tools/deleteShapeItem.js';
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool deletes a shape item, implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like permissions required, whether deletion is permanent/reversible, error handling, or side effects. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (destructive mutation), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like safety, permissions, or response format. For a deletion tool, this leaves critical gaps for an AI agent to use it correctly.

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%, with both parameters ('boardId' and 'itemId') clearly documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and resource ('a specific shape item from a Miro board'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like 'delete-item' (generic) and 'delete-shape-item' (specific), though it doesn't explicitly contrast them. The verb+resource combination is specific but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings include 'delete-item' (generic deletion) and 'delete-shape-item' (specific), but the description doesn't mention when to choose one over the other or any prerequisites. Usage is implied by the name but not explicitly stated.

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/k-jarzyna/mcp-miro'

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