Skip to main content
Glama

delete-sticky-note-item

Remove a specific sticky note from a Miro board by providing the board ID and item ID to clean up content and maintain board organization.

Instructions

Delete a specific sticky note item from a Miro board

Input Schema

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

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that performs input validation and deletes the sticky note item using MiroClient API.
    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().deleteStickyNoteItem(boardId, itemId);
        return ServerResponse.text(JSON.stringify({ success: true, message: "Sticky note deleted successfully" }, null, 2));
      } catch (error) {
        return ServerResponse.error(error);
      }
    }
  • The ToolSchema defining the tool's name, description, and input arguments schema using Zod.
    const deleteStickyNoteItemTool: ToolSchema = {
      name: "delete-sticky-note-item",
      description: "Delete a specific sticky note item from a Miro board",
      args: {
        boardId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the board that contains the sticky note"),
        itemId: z.string().describe("Unique identifier (ID) of the sticky note that you want to delete")
      },
  • src/index.ts:137-137 (registration)
    Registration of the tool in the ToolBootstrapper instance.
    .register(deleteStickyNoteItemTool)
  • src/index.ts:36-36 (registration)
    Import of the deleteStickyNoteItemTool for registration.
    import deleteStickyNoteItemTool from './tools/deleteStickyNoteItem.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 sticky note, implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, or has side effects (e.g., affecting other board elements). This leaves significant gaps for a destructive operation.

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, clear sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't cover critical context like what happens after deletion (e.g., confirmation, error handling), permissions required, or how it differs from similar tools. Given the complexity and lack of structured data, more detail is needed for safe and effective use.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for both parameters (boardId and itemId). The description doesn't add any meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining how to obtain these IDs or their format. Given the high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the parameter documentation adequately.

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 the target resource ('a specific sticky note item from a Miro board'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete-item' or 'delete-sticky-note-item' (which appears to be the same tool name), missing full sibling distinction.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete-item' or other deletion tools in the sibling list. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing the board and item IDs, or when deletion is appropriate versus other operations.

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