OpenProject CE MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Delete version

delete_version

Destructive

Permanently remove a version created by mistake, once user confirmation is given. OpenProject refuses deletion while work packages still reference it, so close finished releases instead.

Instructions

Permanently delete a version.

Use it only for a version created by mistake. For a finished release or sprint, update_version(status='closed') is almost always the right answer: it keeps the history and stops new assignments.

Returns a small confirmation once OpenProject accepts the deletion. Work packages are NOT deleted — they simply lose their version — but that only happens on instances that allow the deletion at all.

Pitfalls: OpenProject refuses (422) to delete a version that work packages still reference; the error hint explains how to find them. Deleting a shared version affects every project that used it. The 'manage versions' permission is required, so a 403 is about the account.

Cross-references: list_versions for the id; update_version(status='closed') for the reversible alternative; list_work_packages to find what still points at the version before removing it.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`confirm`	No	Must be true. Ask the user first: there is no undo. Calling with confirm=false returns a confirmation_required error and deletes nothing.
`version_id`	Yes	Numeric version id to delete. Read it back with list_versions first — version names repeat across projects, ids do not.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`deleted`	Yes
`message`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.4.0Oct 24, 2026
- removedOutput schema / description
```
Removed value: -"Outcome of ``delete_version``."
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / deleted / description
```
Removed value: -"True once OpenProject accepted the deletion."
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / id / description
```
Removed value: -"Id of the version that was deleted."
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / message / description
```
Removed value: -"Human-readable confirmation."
```
First observedv0.1.0Aug 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, and the description adds substantial context beyond that: work packages survive but lose their version, deletion may be disallowed per instance, 422 when work packages still reference it, 403 means a permission problem, and shared versions affect every project. This is well past the bar set by the annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the one-line purpose, then organized into labeled sections (Pitfalls, Cross-references) that an agent can scan. Slightly long, and the sentence about the return value is redundant given an output schema exists, but nothing is wasted in substance.

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?

For a destructive, non-idempotent mutation, the description covers the safety gate, the failure modes with status codes, the permission requirement, and the blast radius on shared versions. An output schema handles returns, so nothing an agent needs before calling is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters already document themselves, including the confirm=false safety behavior. The description reinforces where to obtain version_id ('list_versions for the id') but adds no syntax or format meaning the schema lacks, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Permanently delete') and resource ('a version'), with the permanence qualifier front-loaded. It immediately distinguishes itself from update_version, which the description frames as the normal path for closed releases.

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?

Gives an explicit inclusion criterion ('only for a version created by mistake') and a named alternative with the exact call signature: ``update_version(status='closed')`` is 'almost always the right answer'. The tradeoff (keeps history, stops new assignments) is spelled out so the choice is unambiguous.

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

Deploy Server