Shortcut MCP Server

Delete Story Link

delete_story_link

Delete a link between two stories permanently. Confirmation with confirm_delete=true and 'CONFIRM_WRITE' is required.

Instructions

Delete a link between two stories. 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_link_id": "<story_link_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_story_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`confirm`	No	Must be CONFIRM_WRITE to execute
`dry_run`	No
`story_link_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

A4/5.0

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. It discloses that deletion is irreversible and requires explicit confirmation, which is critical behavioral information. It does not mention dry_run semantics or error outcomes, but the key safety traits are covered.

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 three concise sentences, each adding value: purpose, irreversibility, and confirmation requirements. It is front-loaded and free of redundancy or filler.

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 deletion tool, it covers the essential purpose and safety warnings. However, it omits the meaning of dry_run (a parameter with no schema description) and does not describe return values or fallback behavior. The absence of an output schema and annotations increases the burden, making this only minimally adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 50%, and the description fails to compensate. It repeats confirm and confirm_delete requirements already in the schema but provides no explanation for story_link_id or dry_run. This leaves the dry_run parameter completely unexplained, adding little value over the schema.

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 clearly states 'Delete a link between two stories' with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_story or delete_epic, which delete different entities.

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?

It provides clear context: use this to delete a story link. It also includes important prerequisites (confirm_delete=true, confirm='CONFIRM_WRITE'). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Deploy Server