Skip to main content
Glama

delete_lipsync

Remove a lipsync video permanently from the Tavus MCP Server using its unique identifier.

Instructions

Delete a lipsync permanently

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lipsync_idYesUnique identifier for the lipsync

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that executes the delete_lipsync tool logic - makes a DELETE request to /lipsync/{lipsync_id} endpoint and returns success message
    private async deleteLipsync(args: any) {
      const { lipsync_id } = args;
      await this.axiosInstance.delete(`/lipsync/${lipsync_id}`);
      return {
        content: [{
          type: 'text',
          text: `Successfully deleted lipsync ${lipsync_id}`,
        }],
      };
    }
  • Schema definition for delete_lipsync tool - defines lipsync_id as a required string parameter
    name: 'delete_lipsync',
    description: 'Delete a lipsync permanently',
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        lipsync_id: {
          type: 'string',
          description: 'Unique identifier for the lipsync',
        },
      },
      required: ['lipsync_id'],
    },
  • src/index.ts:746-747 (registration)
    Switch case that routes delete_lipsync tool calls to the deleteLipsync handler method
    case 'delete_lipsync':
      return await this.deleteLipsync(request.params.arguments);
Behavior2/5

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 states the action is 'permanent', which is a critical behavioral trait not obvious from the name alone. However, it lacks other important details: it doesn't specify if deletion requires specific permissions, what happens on success/failure, or any rate limits. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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—a single sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the key action ('Delete') and resource, making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place by conveying essential information.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a destructive deletion with no output schema and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It mentions permanence but omits critical context: error handling, confirmation requirements, or what the agent should expect after invocation. For a tool that permanently deletes data, more guidance is needed to ensure safe and correct usage.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'lipsync_id' fully documented in the schema as a 'Unique identifier for the lipsync'. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Delete') and resource ('a lipsync'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like 'delete_conversation' or 'delete_video' by specifying the resource type. However, it doesn't explicitly mention the permanent nature beyond what's implied by 'Delete', which could be slightly more specific.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing the lipsync_id from 'get_lipsync' or 'list_lipsyncs'), exclusions, or related tools. This leaves the agent without context for proper tool selection.

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

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/rakeshdavid/Tavus-MCP'

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