action1-mcp-server

Delete an endpoint group

action1_delete_group

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete an existing endpoint group from a specified organization. This tool removes obsolete configurations and helps maintain a clean, organized endpoint management structure.

Instructions

Delete an endpoint group. Deletes an existing group in the specified organization. Perm: manage_endpoints.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`org_id`	No	Org UUID.
`confirm`	No	Required to execute. Exact string "YES".
`dry_run`	No	Default true (preview). Set false to execute.
`group_id`	Yes	Provide an endpoint group ID.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`tool`	No
`type`	No
`status`	No
`dry_run`	No
`would_send`	No
`user_message`	No
`developer_message`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed11 schema fields changedv0.6.0Oct 26, 2026
- changedInput schema / $schema
```
Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
```
- changedOutput schema / $schema
```
Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
```
- changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -trueNew value: +{}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / developer_message
```
Added value: +{}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / dry_run
```
Added value: +{}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / id
```
Added value: +{}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / status
```
Added value: +{}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / tool
```
Added value: +{}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / type
```
Added value: +{}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / user_message
```
Added value: +{}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / would_send
```
Added value: +{}
```
First observedv0.5.0Jun 27, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, so the risk profile is covered structurally. The description adds the required permission ('Perm: manage_endpoints'), which is genuine extra context, but it omits the two-step safety protocol (confirm must be exactly "YES", dry_run defaults true) and says nothing about cascading effects on member endpoints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the verb+resource, which is correct. However, sentence two ('Deletes an existing group in the specified organization') largely restates sentence one, and the permission tag trails as a fragment — the space would be better spent on consequences or the dry-run/confirm workflow.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Output schema and rich annotations mean return values and safety posture need not be described. But for a destructive group deletion, the description should disclose what happens to endpoints assigned to the group and how the confirm/dry_run guard works — that context is only implicit in the schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters including confirm and dry_run are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema carries the load.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete an endpoint group'), and the sibling list makes the target unambiguous — this is clearly not action1_delete_endpoint, action1_update_group, or action1_delete_deployer. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the resource noun does the disambiguating work.

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?

No guidance on when to delete a group versus updating it or removing endpoints individually, and no mention of prerequisites or consequence (e.g., what happens to endpoints still in the group). The presence of confirm/dry_run params implies a guarded workflow the description never explains.

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

Deploy Server