Skip to main content
Glama

liara_delete_disk

Remove a disk from an application on the Liara cloud platform by specifying the app and disk names to manage storage resources.

Instructions

Delete a disk

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appNameYesThe name of the app
diskNameYesThe name of the disk to delete

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for deleting a disk in a Liara project. This implements the core logic of the 'liara_delete_disk' tool by calling the Liara API to delete the specified disk.
    export async function deleteDisk(
        client: LiaraClient,
        appName: string,
        diskName: string
    ): Promise<void> {
        validateAppName(appName);
        validateRequired(diskName, 'Disk name');
        await client.delete(`/v1/projects/${appName}/disks/${diskName}`);
    }
  • Type definitions related to disks, including Disk interface used in API responses.
    export interface Disk {
  • Validation helpers used in deleteDisk, like validateAppName and validateRequired. (Assuming content based on usage; exact lines approximate.)
    constructor(
        message: string,
        public code?: string,
        public details?: any,
        public suggestions?: string[]
  • Validation calls within the handler.
        validateAppName(appName);
        validateRequired(diskName, 'Disk name');
        await client.delete(`/v1/projects/${appName}/disks/${diskName}`);
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Delete' implies a destructive mutation, but the description doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, affects associated resources, or has confirmation steps. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in safety and operational context.

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 ('Delete a disk') - a single sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action, though this brevity comes at the cost of completeness for a destructive operation.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It should address behavioral aspects (irreversibility, dependencies, permissions) and expected outcomes. The current description provides minimal context beyond the basic action, leaving critical gaps for safe and effective tool invocation.

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 both parameters (appName, diskName) clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what's in the schema (e.g., format examples, relationships between app and disk). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 disk'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from other delete operations in the sibling list (like liara_delete_app, liara_delete_backup, etc.), which would require mentioning it specifically deletes disks rather than other resources.

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 an existing disk), consequences (e.g., data loss), or when to choose other tools like liara_delete_app or liara_resize_disk. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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/razavioo/liara-mcp'

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