Skip to main content
Glama
umami-mcp

umami-mcp

by mikusnuz

delete_report

Permanently removes a saved Umami Analytics report using its unique report ID.

Instructions

Delete a saved report

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": {
      "reportId": "<reportId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reportIdYesReport UUID to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / reportId / format
      Added value: +"uuid"
  2. First observedv1.2.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and it discloses almost nothing. It does not say deletion is permanent/irreversible, does not state which permission or role is required, does not note whether scheduled runs or shares referencing the report are affected, and gives no indication of the response. For a destructive mutation with zero annotation coverage this is a substantial gap.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single front-loaded phrase with zero filler. The brevity is not wordiness-driven padding, though the same syllable count could have carried a warning about irreversibility instead.

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?

A destructive, unannotated, single-parameter tool with no output schema should at minimum say the deletion is permanent and what it affects. Nothing beyond the bare operation is conveyed, so an agent cannot confidently decide whether to call it or warn the user first.

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 coverage is 100% and the single reportId parameter is already documented as a UUID, so the description adds nothing but also loses nothing. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does all the work.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Delete a saved report"), which is enough for an agent to identify the operation unambiguously. It does not differentiate from siblings like delete_dashboard/delete_segment or point to list_reports/get_report for the surrounding workflow, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as update_report or simply leaving a report unused, and no mention of prerequisites or confirmation requirements. The agent must infer everything about the appropriate use context from the name alone.

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