secobserve-mcp

Delete SecObserve Record

secobserve_delete

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a SecObserve record by resource type and ID. Products and product groups require exact name confirmation; deletion cascades to child records.

Instructions

Permanently delete a SecObserve record. Deletion cascades and cannot be undone.

Deleting a product removes its branches, observations, license components, metrics history and VEX documents; deleting a product group removes its child products too. Those two therefore require confirm_name to match the record's exact name, and the whole tool is disabled unless SECOBSERVE_ALLOW_DELETE is set on the server.

Args: params (DeleteInput): Validated input containing: - resource (str): Resource name supporting delete. - id (int): Primary key of the record. - confirm_name (Optional[str]): Exact name; required for products and product_groups, case- and whitespace-sensitive.

Returns: str: A one-line confirmation naming what was deleted.

Examples: - Use when: "remove license policy item 88" -> resource="license_policy_items", id=88 - Use when: the user has explicitly confirmed deleting product 12 named "Example Product" -> resource="products", id=12, confirm_name="Example Product" - Don't use when: you want to stop tracking findings (assess them as "Not affected" or "Risk accepted" instead, which keeps the history).

Error Handling: Refused when SECOBSERVE_ALLOW_DELETE is unset, when the resource has no delete operation, or when confirm_name is missing for a product or product group. A 409 means something still references the record.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.2Sep 17, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses cascading deletion effects, irreversibility, the SECOBSERVE_ALLOW_DELETE server-side guard, confirm_name requirements, and 409 conflict behavior. This provides substantial operational context the annotations alone do not convey. No contradiction with the annotations is present.

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 long but every section earns its place: danger warning, cascade specifics, safety guard, parameter details, examples, and error handling. It is well structured with headings and front-loads the most important irreversible-deletion warning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers prerequisites, return value format, refusal conditions, error semantics, and safe alternatives. For a destructive tool with one nested parameter and no detailed output schema, this is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Despite the 0% schema description coverage signal, the Args section fully documents each parameter, including the conditional requirement for confirm_name and case/whitespace sensitivity. Concrete examples mapping natural-language requests to resource/id/confirm_name values add practical meaning far beyond the bare schema.

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 precise verb and resource: 'Permanently delete a SecObserve record.' It clearly distinguishes itself from update/assess/list siblings by emphasizing irreversible deletion and cascading behavior. The title and description align, and the scope of what can be deleted is made concrete.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description includes explicit 'Use when' examples and an explicit 'Don't use when' case, directing agents toward assessment alternatives instead of deletion when the goal is to stop tracking findings. This is exactly the kind of when-to-use versus when-not-to-use guidance that helps an agent select the right tool.

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

Deploy Server