Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
seo-factory-mcp

seo-factory-mcp

by skiddgoddamn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

delete_article

Delete an article from your site using its slug or ID. Requires explicit confirmation to prevent accidental removal, and does not automatically notify search engines.

Instructions

⚠️ Удалить статью (DELETE /api/articles/{id}; resolve по slug). Требует confirm:true. 404 — нет статьи, 403 — чужая (админ-аккаунт может удалять чужие). После удаления IndexNow НЕ уведомляется — URL останется в индексе; при необходимости снять через Вебмастер.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "delete_article"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
siteNo
slugNo
confirmNoОбязательно true — операция необратима

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses important behavioral traits: the operation is irreversible (confirm), permission checks (403 for non-owner), and that IndexNow is not notified, leaving the URL in the index. This goes beyond basic deletion.

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 concise and front-loaded with a warning emoji and verb. It conveys key information in a few sentences without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, required parameter (confirm), error handling, and side effect (IndexNow). It lacks return value explanation but that is acceptable without an output schema.

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 coverage is only 25% (only confirm has a description). The description explains that slug is used for resolution and that confirm must be true, but does not clarify id or site parameters. This leaves ambiguity.

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 the operation ('Удалить статью') and specifies the HTTP method and resolution by slug. It distinguishes from siblings like update_article and publish_article.

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?

The description includes critical usage conditions: requires confirm:true, error codes for 404 and 403, and notes that admin accounts can delete others' articles. However, it does not explicitly compare to sibling tools for when to use.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools