chat-export-server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

projects_delete

Destructive

Permanently deletes a provider project or folder after confirmation and required permissions, so you can remove unwanted containers. Move chats first; local SQLite cache rows are not deleted.

Instructions

Permanently delete a project/folder on the provider. Destructive: requires confirm:true, allowProjects, and allowDestructive on the browser. Prefer projects_move_chat to rehome chats first. Does not delete local SQLite cache rows.

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>",
      "containerId": "<containerId>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "projects_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Optional name hint for UI confirmation matching
`confirm`	Yes	Must be true to proceed with deletion
`platform`	Yes	Provider id: chatgpt \| grok \| grok-x \| claude \| copilot \| qwen \| deepseek \| perplexity
`containerId`	Yes	Project/container id to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv1.0.4Nov 11, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description

Previous value: -"must be true to proceed"New value: +"Must be true to proceed with deletion"

addedInput schema / properties / containerId / description
```
Added value: +"Project/container id to delete"
```

addedInput schema / properties / name / description

Added value: +"Optional name hint for UI confirmation matching"

addedInput schema / properties / platform / description

Added value: +"Provider id: chatgpt | grok | grok-x | claude | copilot | qwen | deepseek | perplexity"

First observedv1.0.3Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, but the description goes well beyond them: it discloses the required confirm:true flag, the two browser-side capability gates (allowProjects, allowDestructive), and the scope boundary that local SQLite cache rows survive the delete. Those are non-obvious permission and side-effect details an agent cannot infer from the schema.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the destructive nature and preconditions, then the alternative, then the cache caveat. No filler and every clause carries operational information.

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 destructive, gated mutation with no output schema, the definition covers permissions, confirmation, alternatives, and cache side effects. The one gap is what happens to chats still inside the project if the caller does not move them first — deleted, orphaned, or blocked is left ambiguous.

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 four parameters including the confirm gate and the platform enum are already documented in the schema. The description only echoes the confirm requirement and adds nothing about containerId or name-hint semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and effect ("Permanently delete") plus the exact resource ("a project/folder on the provider"), which separates it from chats_delete and chat_cache_delete in the sibling list. The word "Permanently" also distinguishes it from reversible operations.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to projects_move_chat as the preferred first step when chats need rehoming, and names the precondition set (confirm:true, allowProjects, allowDestructive). It stops short of stating when deletion should be refused outright, so it is clear context rather than a full when/when-not decision tree.

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