Skip to main content
Glama
sayranovv
by sayranovv

delete_note

Remove a specific note from the Notes MCP Server by providing its filename to declutter your workspace and manage your Markdown notes efficiently.

Instructions

Delete a note

Args: filename: Note filename

Returns: Confirmation message of deletion

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filenameYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The @mcp.tool() decorator registers the subsequent delete_note function as an MCP tool named "delete_note".
    @mcp.tool()
  • The handler function for the delete_note tool. It deletes the specified note file from the notes directory and returns a success or not-found message.
    def delete_note(filename: str) -> str:
        """
        Delete a note
        
        Args:
            filename: Note filename
        
        Returns:
            Confirmation message of deletion
        """
        ensure_notes_dir()
        filepath = os.path.join(NOTES_DIR, filename)
        
        if not os.path.exists(filepath):
            return f"Note '{filename}' not found"
        
        os.remove(filepath)
        return f"Note '{filename}' deleted"
  • The docstring provides the tool schema, describing parameters (filename: str) and return value.
    """
    Delete a note
    
    Args:
        filename: Note filename
    
    Returns:
        Confirmation message of deletion
    """
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 tool deletes a note and returns a confirmation, but doesn't mention critical aspects like whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects on related data, or includes error handling for non-existent files. This is inadequate 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the main action ('Delete a note'), followed by brief sections for Args and Returns. There's no wasted text, though the structure is minimalistic. Every sentence serves a purpose, making it efficient but not richly informative.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive operation with no annotations) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is partially complete. It covers the basic action and parameter semantics but lacks behavioral context like safety warnings or usage guidelines. For a deletion tool, this is a minimal viable description with clear gaps.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The description adds meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It explains that 'filename' refers to a 'Note filename', clarifying the parameter's purpose. However, it doesn't provide format details (e.g., file extension, path structure) or examples, leaving some ambiguity. With one parameter and low schema coverage, this is above baseline but not fully comprehensive.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'Delete a note' which is a clear verb+resource combination, but it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_note' or 'create_note' beyond the obvious action. It's a basic statement of function without specificity about scope or constraints.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., note must exist), exclusions, or relationships to siblings like 'list_notes' for verification. It's a bare statement with no contextual usage information.

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/sayranovv/notes-mcp-server'

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