Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Wistia MCP Server

Wistia MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Delete Localization

delete_localization
Destructive

Removes a localization from a Wistia media item using its media and localization hashed IDs. Requires explicit confirmation before the deletion.

Instructions

Deletes a localization.

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. Requires confirm=true for the requested mutation. May share access, notify people or incur provider charges.

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": {
      "media_hashed_id": "<media_hashed_id>",
      "localization_hashed_id": "<localization_hashed_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_localization"
  }
}

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.
media_hashed_idYesThe hashed ID of the localization's media.
localization_hashed_idYesThe hashed ID of the localization to delete.

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

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety is partly covered. The description adds genuinely new context: the required permission scope, the confirm=true gate, and side effects ('May share access, notify people or incur provider charges').

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the remaining text is supporting detail. The nested markdown permission block is slightly heavy but every part (auth scope, confirm gate, side effects) earns its place.

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 mutation with no output schema, the description covers auth requirements, the confirmation gate, and side effects — the key things an agent needs before calling. It could note irreversibility or the effect on the parent media, but the essentials are present.

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 all four parameters are already documented, including confirm's meaning. The description restates confirm=true but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Deletes a localization') that clearly positions it against create_localization, list_localizations, and get_localization in the sibling set. It does not explicitly name those siblings, but the action is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives real invocation preconditions (required token permission scope, confirm=true), which is useful guidance. However, it never says when to prefer this over alternatives or what happens to the parent media, so it is adequate rather than complete routing guidance.

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