Skip to main content
Glama

Delete recurring meeting

delete_recurring_meeting
Destructive

Permanently delete a recurring meeting series, including its template, schedule, and all occurrences. Requires explicit user confirmation because the action is irreversible.

Instructions

Permanently delete a recurring series: template, schedule, and EVERY occurrence.

Use only on explicit user instruction, and make sure the user means the whole series: every instantiated meeting of the series — past minutes included — is destroyed with the template, and when the series has notify set, participants are emailed cancellations. To drop a single slot instead, cancel_recurring_meeting_occurrence is the right tool, and delete_meeting removes one instantiated meeting.

Returns a small confirmation object once OpenProject accepts the deletion.

Pitfalls. This needs the 'delete meetings' permission, so a 403 is about the account, not the id. A 404 means the id is wrong, the series was already deleted — or OpenProject before 17.4, which has no recurring-meetings API at all; the hint names all readings.

Cross-references: get_recurring_meeting to check what you are about to destroy; cancel_recurring_meeting_occurrence for one slot; delete_meeting for one instantiated meeting.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoMust be true. Ask the user to confirm first — the API offers no undo. Calling with confirm=false returns a confirmation_required error rather than deleting anything.
recurring_meeting_idYesNumeric series id to delete permanently, from list_recurring_meetings. Read it back with get_recurring_meeting first and show the user the title — this removes every occurrence, not one meeting.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesId of the meeting, agenda item, outcome or recurring series that was deleted.
deletedYesTrue once OpenProject accepted the deletion.
messageYesHuman-readable confirmation naming what was removed.
Behavior5/5

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

Even though annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, the description adds critical behavioral context: past minutes are destroyed, participants are emailed cancellations when notify is set, permission requirements (403 indicates account problem), 404 has three possible meanings including OpenProject version limits, and the return is a confirmation object. It also explains the confirm parameter's role in preventing accidental deletion.

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 dense but every sentence adds value: primary purpose, usage guardrail, return value, pitfalls, cross-references. It is well-structured with clear paragraph breaks (Pitfalls, Cross-references) and front-loads the most critical information. No fluff or redundancy.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given this is a destructive, complex operation with an output schema, the description provides comprehensive context: permission errors, version compatibility, how to confirm scope, alternative tools, and what the return object is. It leaves no obvious gap for an agent to misuse the tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for both parameters (confirm must be true, recurring_meeting_id from list_recurring_meetings). The description adds complementary context by reinforcing that the ID refers to the whole series and advising to read it back with get_recurring_meeting and show the user the title. It doesn't repeat schema details but enriches them with operational guidance.

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 it permanently deletes a recurring series (template, schedule, and EVERY occurrence), which is a specific action on a specific resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like cancel_recurring_meeting_occurrence and delete_meeting, eliminating ambiguity about scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Use only on explicit user instruction, and make sure the user means the whole series'. It names exact alternatives for dropping a single slot or a single instantiated meeting, and cross-references get_recurring_meeting for pre-checking. This is textbook when-to-use/when-not-to-use clarity.

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/kar-thik/openproject-mcp'

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