Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

Wistia MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Bulk Delete Subfolders

bulk_delete_subfolders
Destructive

Deletes multiple Wistia subfolders asynchronously and soft-deletes their media, which can be restored from trash until purged. Use Delete Subfolder to retain media.

Instructions

Deletes multiple subfolders asynchronously. Their media is also soft-deleted and can be restored from the trash by an account owner or manager until it is purged. To keep the media, use the Delete Subfolder endpoint, which moves it to the folder's root level.

Requires api token with one of the following permissions

Read, update & delete anything

Tokens with the "Act with a team member's permissions" permission (all:delegate_to_contact_permissions scope) can also be used. Requests made with such a token are authorized using the permissions of the contact assigned to the token.

An expiring access token created with the all:delegate_to_contact_permissions scope and an authorization granting the update permission on this folder can also be used.

An expiring access token created with the all:delegate_to_contact_permissions scope and an authorization granting the update permission on the folder can also be used. Requires confirm=true for the requested mutation. May share access, notify people or incur provider charges.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoNamed private Wistia account; selects credentials, not a remote account ID.
confirmNoSet true only when the user asked for exactly this action.
payloadNoComplete JSON request body instead of body flags. Supports current nested customization, caption and nullable values.
folder_idYesThe hashed ID of the folder containing the subfolders
hashed_idsNoAn array of the subfolder hashed IDs to be deleted.
payload_fileNoRegular local JSON body file, at most 5 MB. Cannot be mixed with body flags or payload.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"Must be true for the specific user-requested write."New value: +"Set true only when the user asked for exactly this action."
  2. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive/non-idempotent, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: soft-delete semantics, restorability from trash by an account owner/manager until purge, accepted token/permission scopes, delegation behavior, and the confirm=true guard. This is exactly the kind of disclosure a destructive bulk tool needs.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core sentence is front-loaded and efficient, but the permission section is bloated and contains a literally duplicated paragraph about expiring access tokens, plus generic boilerplate ('May share access, notify people or incur provider charges'). Structure is sound, but the waste and repetition penalize it.

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?

Covers destructive semantics, restore path, auth and confirmation for a 6-parameter nested-object mutation with no output schema. The only real gap is that it says the operation is asynchronous but never points to get_job_status or explains how to observe completion.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents folder_id, hashed_ids, payload, payload_file, account and confirm. The description only reinforces the confirm=true requirement and says nothing about the payload vs. body-flag mutual exclusion or the array element format, 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Deletes multiple subfolders') plus the async nature, and explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling 'Delete Subfolder' endpoint. An agent can distinguish it from delete_subfolder/delete_folder without opening a schema.

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?

Gives explicit routing guidance ('To keep the media, use the Delete Subfolder endpoint, which moves it to the folder's root level') and states permission prerequisites and the confirm=true requirement. Missing a clear 'use this when...' framing for the bulk case itself, but the alternative and prerequisites are well covered.

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