Skip to main content
Glama
kunwarVivek

mcp-github-project-manager

delete_draft_issue

Remove draft issues from GitHub projects to clean up project boards and maintain organized workflows.

Instructions

Delete a draft issue from a GitHub project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
draftIssueIdYes

Implementation Reference

  • Main handler implementation using GitHub GraphQL API mutation 'deleteProjectV2DraftIssue' to delete the specified draft issue.
    async deleteDraftIssue(data: {
      draftIssueId: string;
    }): Promise<{ success: boolean; message: string }> {
      try {
        const mutation = `
          mutation($input: DeleteProjectV2DraftIssueInput!) {
            deleteProjectV2DraftIssue(input: $input) {
              draftIssue {
                id
              }
            }
          }
        `;
    
        interface DeleteDraftIssueResponse {
          deleteProjectV2DraftIssue: {
            draftIssue: {
              id: string;
            };
          };
        }
    
        await this.factory.graphql<DeleteDraftIssueResponse>(mutation, {
          input: {
            draftIssueId: data.draftIssueId
          }
        });
    
        return {
          success: true,
          message: `Draft issue ${data.draftIssueId} deleted successfully`
        };
      } catch (error) {
        throw this.mapErrorToMCPError(error);
      }
    }
  • Tool definition with Zod input schema, description, and usage examples. Schema requires 'draftIssueId' string.
    export const deleteDraftIssueTool: ToolDefinition<DeleteDraftIssueArgs> = {
      name: "delete_draft_issue",
      description: "Delete a draft issue from a GitHub project",
      schema: deleteDraftIssueSchema as unknown as ToolSchema<DeleteDraftIssueArgs>,
      examples: [
        {
          name: "Remove draft",
          description: "Delete a draft issue that's no longer needed",
          args: {
            draftIssueId: "DI_kwDOLhQ7gc4AABB"
          }
        }
      ]
    };
  • Registers the deleteDraftIssueTool in the central ToolRegistry singleton.
    this.registerTool(deleteDraftIssueTool);
  • src/index.ts:339-340 (registration)
    MCP server dispatches 'delete_draft_issue' tool calls to ProjectManagementService.deleteDraftIssue method.
    case "delete_draft_issue":
      return await this.service.deleteDraftIssue(args);
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the destructive action ('Delete') but doesn't mention critical details like whether this operation is reversible, what permissions are required, potential side effects, or error conditions. This leaves significant gaps for safe tool invocation.

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 with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple operation and front-loads the essential information (action + resource). 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?

For a destructive operation with no annotations, no output schema, and undocumented parameters, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral risks, parameter meaning, or expected outcomes. Given the complexity of a delete operation in a GitHub context, more contextual information is needed.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no information about the 'draftIssueId' parameter. It doesn't explain what a draft issue ID is, where to find it, or its expected format. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 draft issue from a GitHub project'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'delete_issue' or 'delete_project_item', which reduces clarity about its unique scope.

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. There's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing a draft issue ID), exclusions (e.g., cannot delete published issues), or comparisons to sibling tools like 'delete_issue' or 'remove_project_item'.

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/kunwarVivek/mcp-github-project-manager'

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