pocketbase-mcp

Delete record

delete_record

Delete a single record permanently by ID from a specified PocketBase collection. This action removes unwanted data irreversibly, keeping your database organized.

Instructions

Permanently delete a single record by id. Cannot be undone.

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": {
      "collection": "<collection>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_record"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Record id to delete.
`collection`	Yes	Collection id or name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly states the operation is permanent and cannot be undone, which is the most critical behavioral trait. It does not mention permissions, error behavior, or cascading effects, but for a simple record delete the irreversibility warning is strong.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler. The essential action and the critical warning are front-loaded, and every word contributes meaning.

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 tool is simple, with two documented parameters and no nested objects. The description covers the core semantics and the irreversible destructive nature. It does not describe return values or error handling, but for a straightforward delete operation this is not a major gap.

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%, with both id and collection clearly documented in the schema. The description adds only 'by id', which aligns with the schema and does not introduce misleading or extra meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema already carries the parameter documentation burden.

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 clearly states the action ('Permanently delete'), the resource ('a single record'), and the key identifier ('by id'). It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling deletion tools such as delete_collection or delete_backup.

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 phrase 'single record by id' implies when to use it, but there is no explicit guidance about alternatives, such as using truncate_collection for bulk deletion or delete_collection for whole collections. The usage context is implied rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server