Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Grok MCP

Grok MCP

by merterbak
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

delete_stateful_response

Remove a stored chat completion from xAI's servers by providing its response ID. Get confirmation of deletion.

Instructions

Delete a stored chat completion from xAI's servers.

Args:
    response_id: ID of the stored response to remove.

Returns:
    Confirmation string with the deleted response ID.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "response_id": "<response_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_stateful_response"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
response_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. Added
  6. Removed
  7. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • addedInput schema / title
      Added value: +"delete_stateful_responseArguments"
  8. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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 clearly indicates the action deletes a resource from servers and returns a confirmation, implying permanence. However, it lacks details on authorization requirements or potential side effects beyond the deletion itself.

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 (three sentences) and well-structured: purpose, argument, return. Every word adds value without any fluff.

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 simplicity (one required parameter) and the lack of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers what, how, and the return value. Minor missing details include error handling for invalid IDs.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining that 'response_id' is the ID of the stored response to remove, adding meaningful context beyond the schema's title and type.

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 the verb 'Delete' and the resource 'stored chat completion', making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'retrieve_stateful_response' (which retrieves) and 'chat' (which creates).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for removing stored responses but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. No guidance on prerequisites or potential errors.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools