Permanently remove a Docmost wiki space and all its pages; confirmation is required because the action cannot be undone.
Delete a space and its pages. This cannot be undone.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| confirm | Yes | Must be true to confirm deletion | |
| space_id | Yes | Space UUID or slug |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark this as destructive and non-read-only. The description adds meaningful behavioral disclosures: the entire space and its pages are affected, and the operation cannot be undone. This goes beyond the annotation hints without contradicting them.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences convey the action, scope, and irreversibility with no filler. The core destructive behavior is front-loaded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a two-parameter destructive tool with a full schema and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral information: what is deleted and that it is irreversible. It lacks permission-level context and routing to alternatives, but these are minor given the low complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters already documented, including the confirm const true requirement and the space_id UUID or slug format. The description adds no parameter-specific details, so the baseline of 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a space and its pages'), making the operation unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from sibling delete_page by explicitly stating that pages within the space are deleted.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_page or restore_page. The name implies the scope, but the description does not provide context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving an agent to infer usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.