Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
chat-export-server

chat-export-server

by svergio
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

chats_delete

Destructive

Permanently deletes a chat on the provider UI. Requires confirm:true and destructive permissions enabled; export the chat first if you need a copy.

Instructions

Permanently delete a chat on the provider UI. Destructive and audited: requires confirm:true plus allowDestructive on server and browser. Prefer chats_export first if you need a copy; chat_cache_delete only removes local cache.

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": {
      "platform": "<platform>",
      "chatId": "<chatId>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "chats_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chatIdYesChat id to delete on the provider
confirmYesMust be true to proceed with deletion
platformYesProvider id: chatgpt | grok | grok-x | claude | copilot | qwen | deepseek | perplexity

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / chatId / description
      Added value: +"Chat id to delete on the provider"
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"must be true to proceed"New value: +"Must be true to proceed with deletion"
    • addedInput schema / properties / platform / description
      Added value: +"Provider id: chatgpt | grok | grok-x | claude | copilot | qwen | deepseek | perplexity"
  2. First observedv1.0.3

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds real context beyond the destructiveHint annotation: permanence, audit logging, and the dual server/browser allowDestructive gate. The only shortfall is that it does not say what happens on a failed confirm or whether deletion cascades to attachments/messages, but the safety profile is well covered.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the destructive action, then prerequisites, then alternatives. No wasted wording for a high-risk tool.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a destructive three-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, gating requirements, audit behavior, and escape hatches. Nothing an agent needs to call it safely is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already documented, including the confirm boolean and the platform enum. The description restates the confirm:true requirement rather than adding new parameter-level meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Specific verb plus resource ("Permanently delete a chat on the provider UI") and an explicit disambiguation from chat_cache_delete, which only removes local cache. An agent can distinguish this from the sibling cache-deletion tool without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

States the precondition for use (confirm:true plus allowDestructive on server and browser) and names an alternative action when a copy is needed ("Prefer chats_export first"). It also excludes chat_cache_delete by clarifying that tool's narrower scope.

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