Skip to main content
Glama

delete-chart

Remove charts from PI Dashboard by specifying the chart ID to manage dashboard resources and maintain organized data visualizations.

Instructions

Delete a chart

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesChart ID

Implementation Reference

  • build/index.js:815-833 (registration)
    Registration of the delete-chart tool using server.tool, specifying name, description, input schema, and inline handler function.
    server.tool("delete-chart", "Delete a chart", {
        id: z.number().describe("Chart ID")
    }, async ({ id }) => {
        try {
            await authenticatedRequest(`/charts/${id}`, "DELETE");
            return {
                content: [{
                        type: "text",
                        text: `Chart with ID ${id} successfully deleted.`
                    }]
            };
        }
        catch (error) {
            return {
                isError: true,
                content: [{ type: "text", text: `Error deleting chart: ${getErrorMessage(error)}` }]
            };
        }
    });
  • Zod schema for the tool input: requires a numeric 'id' parameter for the chart ID.
    id: z.number().describe("Chart ID")
  • The handler function that sends a DELETE request to the charts endpoint using the provided chart ID, returns a success message or error response.
    }, async ({ id }) => {
        try {
            await authenticatedRequest(`/charts/${id}`, "DELETE");
            return {
                content: [{
                        type: "text",
                        text: `Chart with ID ${id} successfully deleted.`
                    }]
            };
        }
        catch (error) {
            return {
                isError: true,
                content: [{ type: "text", text: `Error deleting chart: ${getErrorMessage(error)}` }]
            };
        }
    });
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Delete' implies a destructive, irreversible mutation, but the description doesn't specify permissions required, confirmation steps, error handling, or what happens to associated data. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage.

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 at three words ('Delete a chart'), with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource. For such a simple tool, this brevity is appropriate and efficient.

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?

Given this is a destructive mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and minimal description, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like side effects, return values, or error conditions. The agent lacks critical context needed to use this tool safely and effectively.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage with one parameter ('id') clearly documented as 'Chart ID'. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides. According to scoring rules, when schema_description_coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in the description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Delete a chart' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (chart), providing basic purpose. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from other deletion tools like 'delete-category' or explain what type of chart is being deleted. The purpose is understandable but lacks specificity about scope or differentiation from siblings.

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 authentication first), what happens after deletion, or when to choose this over other chart-related tools like 'export-chart' or 'list-charts'. The agent must infer usage 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.

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/mingzilla/pi-api-mcp-server'

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