Skip to main content
Glama
pingidentity

PingOne Advanced Identity Cloud MCP Server

Official
by pingidentity
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Delete Managed Object

deleteManagedObject
Destructive

Delete a managed object by its ID and type from PingOne Advanced Identity Cloud to remove users, roles, groups, or organizations from your identity data.

Instructions

Delete a managed object by ID from PingOne AIC

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
objectIdYesThe object's unique identifier (_id)
objectTypeYesManaged object type (e.g., alpha_user, bravo_user, alpha_role, bravo_role, alpha_group, bravo_group, alpha_organization, bravo_organization). Use listManagedObjects to discover all available types.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / objectType / minLength
      Removed value: -1
    • addedInput schema / properties / objectType / pattern
      Added value: +"^[a-zA-Z0-9_]+$"
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the core safety profile is covered. The description adds almost no behavioral context beyond the annotations—no indication of irreversibility, permission requirements, or side effects of deleting an object.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It identifies the action, resource, lookup key, and system immediately.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple two-parameter destructive tool with strong schema coverage and destructive annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any note on irreversibility, expected result, or failure behavior when the object is not found.

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%, so both objectId and objectType are already well documented, including a pointer to listManagedObjects for discovering types. The description's 'by ID' adds little beyond the schema, which sets the baseline at 3.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (managed object) plus the key lookup dimension (by ID). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling deleteManagedObjectDefinition, but the object vs. definition distinction is reasonably inferable.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as deleteManagedObjectDefinition, nor any prerequisites or warnings. The only implied usage is deleting a specific managed object by ID.

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