Shortcut MCP Server

Delete Story Comment

delete_story_comment

Permanently remove a comment from a Shortcut story with explicit confirmation to prevent accidental deletion.

Instructions

Permanently delete a comment on a Shortcut story. IRREVERSIBLE. Requires confirm_delete=true and confirm='CONFIRM_WRITE'.

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": {
      "story_id": "<story_id>",
      "comment_id": "<comment_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_story_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`confirm`	No	Must be CONFIRM_WRITE to execute
`dry_run`	No
`story_id`	Yes
`comment_id`	Yes
`confirm_delete`	No	Must be true to confirm permanent deletion

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Permanently delete' and 'IRREVERSIBLE,' and it discloses the required confirmation flags, which is strong transparency for a destructive operation.

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 two short sentences with essential information front-loaded. Every word earns its place, and the capital 'IRREVERSIBLE' draws attention to the key risk without adding fluff.

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?

While the description covers critical safety concerns, it omits the behavior of dry_run and does not mention permissions or what happens on success/failure. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, more context would be helpful for a destructive tool.

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 only 40%, so the description needs to compensate. It adds exact expected values for confirm and confirm_delete, but it does not clarify the dry_run parameter, which is semantically ambiguous, and it leaves story_id and comment_id to be inferred from names.

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 uses a specific verb ('delete') with a clear resource ('comment on a Shortcut story') and further specifies it is permanent. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like update_story_comment or delete_story.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_story_comment or delete_story. It includes required confirmation values, which are operational prerequisites rather than usage context.

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

Deploy Server