Skip to main content
Glama

vault_delete

Delete a file from an Obsidian vault and commit the removal to git history, keeping every deletion recoverable. Supports idempotent retries for already-removed files.

Instructions

Delete a single file from the vault (destructive; recoverable via git).

Removes one file and, by default, commits the deletion so it stays recoverable from git history (git revert / git show). Files only — directories are rejected. A non-existent path is an error, unless idempotency_key is set (then a retry against an already-gone file is a no-op success).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesRelative path to the file within the project.
commitNoMust be True (the default). Unlike ``vault_write``, this tool has no deferred mode: it neither uses the commit queue (a delete and a recreate inside one tick would collapse to a single state) nor leaves the removal uncommitted, which is the indefinite deferral ADR-018 §4 removed. ``commit=False`` is rejected with an explanation rather than silently upgraded — see the ADR's 2026-08-09 amendment.
projectYesProject slug or '_meta' for cross-project content.
idempotency_keyNoOptional at-most-once token. If set, a retry with the same key is a no-op after the first delete (ADR-013), which also makes deleting an already-removed file succeed. Empty (default) disables idempotency.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior1/5

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

The description states 'destructive; recoverable via git', but the annotations include destructiveHint: false. This is a direct contradiction. The description does provide rich behavioral context (commit default, idempotency, error conditions), but the contradiction triggers the score 1 rule.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and includes essential caveats (files only, recoverable via git, idempotency behavior) without wasting words. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

The description covers edge cases (error on non-existent path, idempotency, commit behavior) and references git recovery. With the output schema and rich parameter descriptions, it is nearly complete. It loses a point for not providing usage alternatives or addressing the destructive annotation inconsistency.

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 the schema documents all parameters. The description adds general context (e.g., error behavior for non-existent paths) but does not add meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a single file from the vault'. It clearly states that it removes one file, commits the deletion, and explicitly excludes directories. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vault_write and vault_patch.

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 (delete files, not directories; use commit=True) and contrasts with vault_write for commit behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any alternative for directory deletion.

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/mlorentedev/hive'

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