Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ActiveCampaign MCP

ActiveCampaign MCP

by ohneben
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

delete_a_fieldvalue_1

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a custom field value from ActiveCampaign by providing its ID. Permanently removes the record.

Instructions

🔴 DESTRUCTIVE · deletes data · Field Values · DELETE /fieldValues/{id}

Delete a custom field value

Deletes a record. Confirm with the user before calling.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_a_fieldvalue_1"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID of the fieldValue to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. Description adds '🔴 DESTRUCTIVE · deletes data' and 'Deletes a record,' reinforcing the behavior, plus the user confirmation instruction. No contradictions.

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?

Description is extremely concise: two sentences, an emoji warning, and HTTP method. Every word adds value; no fluff. Properly 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?

For a simple delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It states the action, confirms destructive nature, and provides user guidance. Could mention response behavior but not essential.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear parameter description ('ID of the fieldValue to delete'). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so 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?

Description clearly states 'Delete a custom field value' and 'Deletes a record,' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like delete_a_field (field vs field value).

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?

Explicitly instructs 'Confirm with the user before calling,' providing clear usage context for a destructive operation. Does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the instruction is strong.

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