windy-word-mcp

bulk_delete_archives

Remove multiple archive entries (transcripts, audio, video) in one batch. Uses a confirm token to prevent accidental bulk deletion.

Instructions

Tear down multiple archive entries in one call. Each entry's .md transcript + linked audio + linked video are removed. REQUIRES an explicit confirm token "YES-DELETE-" where N matches the ids.length — this is the guard that prevents an agent hallucinating "yes" and accidentally wiping the entire history. Each id's outcome is reported independently in the response (not-found ids do not abort the batch).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "ids": "<ids>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "bulk_delete_archives"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ids`	Yes	Archive ids to delete (from list_archive_entries / search_archives / archives_by_date_range).
`confirm`	Yes	Must equal "YES-DELETE-<N>" where N is ids.length. Mismatch returns 400.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.11.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It reveals destructive nature, confirm token guard, and independent outcome reporting per id. It does not mention authentication or reversibility, but for a delete tool this is sufficient.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by critical detail on confirm token and batch behavior. No unnecessary words.

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?

For a two-parameter batch delete without output schema, the description covers both parameters, the guard condition, and outcome behavior. Could mention if operation is idempotent or not, but overall complete.

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?

Schema covers 100% of parameters, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining confirm token format, source of ids, and that not-found ids do not abort. This goes beyond schema.

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 tool tears down multiple archive entries, removing .md transcripts and linked audio/video. This action is distinct from single deletion and batch export, providing a specific verb and resource.

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 implies batch deletion context and mentions a required confirm token to prevent accidental wiping. It does not explicitly contrast with 'delete_archive_entry' but the sibling list makes the distinction clear.

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

Deploy Server