Skip to main content
Glama
ni-c

wikijs-mcp

by ni-c
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Delete a file

delete_asset
DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete an asset from Wiki.js. Use after listing assets; a confirmation token prevents accidental removal.

Instructions

Deletes an asset permanently. Any page embedding it will show a broken image or a dead link. Requires a confirmation token.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
asset_idYesAsset id from list_assets.
confirm_tokenNoToken from this tool’s previous, unconfirmed call. Omit it to receive one.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
truncatedNoPresent only when the answer was shortened to fit the budget.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / asset_id / maximum
      Previous value: -9007199254740991New value: +2147483647
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.2.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "truncated": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Present only when the answer was shortened to fit the budget.",
+      "properties": {},
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Despite annotations already marking destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, the description adds concrete behavioral details: permanence, impact on embedding pages, and the confirmation-token requirement. This tells an agent what actually happens in the world, which exceeds the value of the annotations alone.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying distinct information: the operation and its permanence, the consequence for pages, and the confirmation requirement. No filler, no restatement of the title, and the most important fact is front-loaded.

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 has a rich schema, output schema, and annotations, so the description need not explain return values. It covers the key behavioral and procedural facts. It loses one point because the two-step confirmation flow is stated only in the schema's parameter description, not in the tool description, creating a slight ambiguity for an agent reading the description alone.

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%, and both parameters have thorough descriptions in the schema (source of asset_id, two-step confirm_token behavior). The tool description repeats only that a confirmation token is required, without adding new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 starts with a clear, specific action: 'Deletes an asset permanently.' The qualifier 'permanently' distinguishes it from any move/rename or soft-delete behavior, and the resource 'asset' cleanly separates it from sibling page, comment, user, and group tools. It needs no comparison to be understood.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear context for using the tool: it is destructive, has permanent consequences (broken images/dead links), and requires a confirmation token. It does not explicitly state when-not-to-use or name alternatives, but no alternative delete-asset tool exists among siblings. Minor gap: it says 'Requires a confirmation token' without clarifying that the token may be omitted on the first call to receive one, though the schema covers this.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools