workspace_delete
Delete a Microsoft Fabric workspace using its workspace ID to free up resources and maintain a clean data environment.
Instructions
Delete a workspace
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workspaceId | Yes | The workspace ID |
Delete a Microsoft Fabric workspace using its workspace ID to free up resources and maintain a clean data environment.
Delete a workspace
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workspaceId | Yes | The workspace ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
v2.8.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description simply restates the delete action and adds no behavioral context beyond what the annotations already indicate. It does not mention irreversibility, cascading effects, permissions, or any other operational nuance.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded, unambiguous sentence with no filler. For a simple single-parameter delete operation, this is appropriately concise.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the low complexity, one required parameter, and destructiveHint annotation, the description covers the core action and the schema covers the parameter. Explicitly stating irreversibility would improve it, but the annotation mitigates that omission.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with the only parameter workspaceId already documented as 'The workspace ID'. The description adds no further meaning to the parameter, so the baseline schema-driven score applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action and resource: 'Delete a workspace'. It is not vague, but it does not add any detail that distinguishes it from the other workspace tools beyond the delete action itself.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides no context around prerequisites, consequences, or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/mkoziel2000/mcp-fabric-api'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server