delete_link
Delete a payment link by its ID, permanently removing it from the gateway.
Instructions
Delete a payment link.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| link_id | Yes | Payment link ID to delete |
Delete a payment link by its ID, permanently removing it from the gateway.
Delete a payment link.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| link_id | Yes | Payment link ID to delete |
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 only states the action 'delete' with no elaboration on permanence, required permissions, or response format. This is minimal and typical of a destructive operation without additional context.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, direct sentence that states the purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a simple delete operation.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally sufficient to identify the operation. However, it lacks behavioral context (e.g., permanence of deletion, error handling) that would be helpful for a destructive action, though the low complexity partially offsets this.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already describes the only parameter (link_id) as 'Payment link ID to delete' with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no further parameter semantics beyond that, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states a specific action (delete) and target (payment link), which distinguishes it from siblings like create_link, get_link, and list_links. It is concise and unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply says 'Delete a payment link' without mentioning any preconditions, side effects, or scenarios where other link tools would be more appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/theYahia/idpay-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server