Skip to main content
Glama

delete_ticket

Remove a ticket from the mcptix MCP server by specifying its ID. This tool helps streamline ticket management within AI-assisted project tracking systems.

Instructions

Delete a ticket

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesTicket ID

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that executes the 'delete_ticket' tool. It validates the input, checks if the ticket exists, deletes it using the database queries, and returns a success response.
    export function handleDeleteTicket(ticketQueries: TicketQueries, args: any): ToolResponse {
      if (!args.id) {
        throw new Error('Ticket ID is required');
      }
    
      // Check if ticket exists
      const existingTicket = ticketQueries.getTicketById(args.id);
      if (!existingTicket) {
        throw new Error(`Ticket with ID ${args.id} not found`);
      }
    
      // Delete ticket
      const success = ticketQueries.deleteTicket(args.id);
    
      return createSuccessResponse({ id: args.id, success });
    }
  • The input schema definition for the 'delete_ticket' tool, specifying that a ticket ID is required.
    {
      name: 'delete_ticket',
      description: 'Delete a ticket',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          id: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Ticket ID',
          },
        },
        required: ['id'],
      },
    },
  • The registration of the 'delete_ticket' tool in the MCP server's request handler switch statement, which routes calls to the handleDeleteTicket function.
    case 'delete_ticket':
      return handleDeleteTicket(ticketQueries, args);
  • The import statement that brings in the delete_ticket handler function for use in the MCP tool setup.
    import { handleDeleteTicket } from './handlers/delete-ticket';
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Delete' implies a destructive mutation, but the description doesn't specify whether this is permanent, requires special permissions, triggers notifications, or returns confirmation. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 extremely concise at three words with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource. While it's under-specified, this dimension scores conciseness, not completeness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't address critical context like irreversible consequences, permission requirements, error conditions, or what happens upon success. The agent lacks sufficient information to use this tool safely and effectively.

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% (the 'id' parameter is documented as 'Ticket ID'), so the schema already provides parameter meaning. The description adds no additional context about parameter format, validation, or where to obtain the ID. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the action ('Delete') and target resource ('a ticket'), which provides a basic understanding of purpose. However, it lacks specificity about what constitutes a ticket in this system and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_ticket' or 'create_ticket' beyond the obvious verb difference.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing ticket ID from get_ticket/list_tickets), irreversible consequences, or when deletion might be inappropriate versus updating or archiving.

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

Related 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/ownlytics/mcptix'

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