Jira Cloud MCP Server

delete_issue

Delete a Jira issue by providing its ID or key, and choose whether to also remove its subtasks. Resolve unwanted project items directly.

Instructions

Delete issue

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": {
      "issueIdOrKey": "<issueIdOrKey>"
    },
    "name": "delete_issue"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`issueIdOrKey`	Yes	The ID or key of the issue.
`deleteSubtasks`	No	Whether the issue's subtasks are deleted when the issue is deleted.	false

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 30, 2026

TDQS

D1.9/5.0

Behavior1/5

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 destructive behavior and side effects. It merely says 'Delete issue' and does not state that deletion is permanent, may cascade to subtasks, or may require specific permissions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

At two words, the description is minimal, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It lacks front-loaded behavioral or usage context, so it fails to earn a higher score.

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

Completeness1/5

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

This is a destructive mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a very sparse description. Critical context such as irreversibility, subtask behavior, permission requirements, and how the deleteSubtasks parameter affects the operation is completely absent.

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 the schema documents both parameters including the enum and default for deleteSubtasks. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'Delete issue' simply restates the tool name, which is a tautology. It identifies the general action and resource but provides no differentiation from sibling tools like submit_bulk_delete, delete_issue_link, or delete_issue_property.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as submit_bulk_delete for bulk operations or delete_issue_link for removing links. The description does not mislead, but it offers no contextual usage direction.

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

Deploy Server