Off Shoring MCP

Delete story

delete_story

Permanently removes a story's local records—branches, turns, profiles, summaries, and write records—requiring confirm=true and the expected revision to prevent accidental deletion.

Instructions

Delete a story's local records: its branches, turns, profiles, summaries and write records. This is destructive and cannot be undone. It requires confirm=true and the current expected_revision.

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": {
      "story_id": "<story_id>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>",
      "expected_revision": "<expected_revision>"
    },
    "name": "delete_story"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`confirm`	Yes
`story_id`	Yes
`expected_revision`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	No
`deleted`	Yes
`story_id`	Yes
`deleted_counts`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does well: it declares the operation destructive, non-reversible, and gated behind a boolean confirm plus an optimistic-concurrency revision. It stops short of saying whether on-disk story files or other users' references survive, which is the main remaining behavioral gap.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with what is destroyed and immediately followed by the safety constraints. Every clause adds information; nothing is redundant or padded.

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 three-parameter mutation with no annotations and an output schema (so return values need not be described), the description covers danger, irreversibility, and the two non-obvious required parameters. It is nearly complete, lacking only story_id semantics and what happens to related external state.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the semantics of two of three parameters well (confirm must be true; expected_revision must be the current value, i.e., a concurrency check), but story_id is only implied by 'a story's local records' and never described.

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 (delete) and resource (a story) and enumerates exactly what gets removed: branches, turns, profiles, summaries, write records. This clearly separates it from siblings like export_story, branch_story, or update_story without needing to name them.

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?

The description implies usage through its prerequisites (confirm=true, current expected_revision) and the irreversibility warning, which signals a last-resort operation. It never explicitly states when to prefer an alternative such as branching or updating instead of deleting, so the when-not guidance is only implied.

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

Deploy Server