Skip to main content
Glama

delete_form

Remove forms from Tally MCP by specifying the form ID. This action permanently deletes the selected form from your Tally.so workspace.

Instructions

DEPRECATED: Use preview_single_delete and confirm_single_delete for secure deletion

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formIdYesID of the form to delete

Implementation Reference

  • Registration and schema definition for the 'delete_form' tool in the MCP tools/list response handler. This is where the tool is advertised to clients.
    {
      name: 'delete_form',
      description: 'Delete a Tally form permanently',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          formId: { type: 'string', description: 'ID of the form to delete' }
        },
        required: ['formId']
      }
    },
  • Schema definition for 'delete_form' tool used in project tools validation.
    {
      name: 'delete_form',
      description: 'Delete a Tally form permanently',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          formId: { type: 'string', description: 'ID of the form to delete' }
        },
        required: ['formId']
      }
  • Mock implementation of the Tally API deleteForm method, likely intended to be called by the tool handler.
    public async deleteForm(_formId: string): Promise<AxiosResponse<{ success: boolean }>> {
      await this.simulateDelay();
      this.checkRateLimit();
      
      if (this.shouldSimulateError()) {
        this.simulateRandomError();
      }
    
      return this.createMockResponse({ success: true }, 204);
    }
Behavior3/5

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 indicates the tool is deprecated and implies it may be less secure than alternatives, but doesn't detail behavioral traits like whether deletion is permanent, requires permissions, or has side effects. The deprecation warning adds some context but leaves key operational aspects unspecified.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the critical deprecation warning, followed by clear alternative recommendations. Every sentence earns its place by conveying essential usage guidance without unnecessary details, making it efficient and well-structured.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (a deletion operation with no annotations and no output schema), the description is reasonably complete for a deprecated tool. It effectively communicates deprecation and alternatives, though it could better explain why it's deprecated (e.g., security risks) or behavioral implications. The lack of output schema is mitigated by the deprecation focus.

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 the single parameter 'formId' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 tool's purpose is for deletion ('delete') of a form resource, which is specific and matches the tool name. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'bulk_delete_forms' or 'preview_single_delete' beyond the deprecation warning, missing explicit differentiation in functionality.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when NOT to use this tool ('DEPRECATED') and names specific alternatives ('preview_single_delete' and 'confirm_single_delete'), including a rationale ('for secure deletion'). This clearly directs users away from this tool toward better options.

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/learnwithcc/tally-mcp'

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