Skip to main content
Glama

delete_video

Remove a video permanently from the Tavus MCP Server by providing its unique identifier to manage storage and content.

Instructions

Delete a video permanently

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
video_idYesUnique identifier for the video

Implementation Reference

  • The deleteVideo method is the handler that executes the delete_video tool logic. It extracts the video_id from arguments, makes a DELETE request to the API endpoint /videos/${video_id}, and returns a success message.
    private async deleteVideo(args: any) {
      const { video_id } = args;
      await this.axiosInstance.delete(`/videos/${video_id}`);
      return {
        content: [{
          type: 'text',
          text: `Successfully deleted video ${video_id}`,
        }],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:321-334 (registration)
    The delete_video tool is registered with its name, description, and input schema. The schema defines a required 'video_id' parameter of type string.
    {
      name: 'delete_video',
      description: 'Delete a video permanently',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          video_id: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Unique identifier for the video',
          },
        },
        required: ['video_id'],
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:710-711 (registration)
    Switch case that routes the 'delete_video' tool request to the deleteVideo handler method with the provided arguments.
    case 'delete_video':
      return await this.deleteVideo(request.params.arguments);
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'permanently' indicates irreversibility, it doesn't cover other critical aspects like required permissions, confirmation steps, error conditions (e.g., if video doesn't exist), or what happens to associated resources. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 at just three words, with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. 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?

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'permanently' entails (e.g., no recovery options), what the tool returns (success/failure indicators), or how it interacts with sibling tools (e.g., if deleting a video affects related conversations or speeches). Given the complexity and risk of deletion, more context is needed.

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%, with the single parameter 'video_id' clearly documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline score 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 video'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from other delete_* siblings (like delete_conversation, delete_lipsync, etc.), which would require specifying it's for video resources specifically.

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. There's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing the video_id), when not to use it (e.g., for temporary deletion), or what happens after deletion. With multiple delete_* siblings available, this lack of differentiation is a significant gap.

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