mcp-paperless-ngx

Delete storage path

delete_storage_path

Destructive

Permanently remove a storage path configuration. Documents remain unaffected but lose this assignment, and the deletion cannot be undone. Requires user confirmation.

Instructions

Permanently delete a storage path. Documents are not deleted, but they lose this assignment and it cannot be restored. Confirm with the user first.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_storage_path"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Aug 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Even though annotations already mark this as destructive, the description adds important context: documents are not deleted, the assignment is lost, and it cannot be restored. This goes beyond the annotation and helps the agent anticipate side effects and irreversibility.

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 carry the core action, side-effect warning, and a usage instruction. There is no filler, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 simple one-parameter destructive tool, the description is largely complete: it explains permanence, non-deletion of documents, and requires user confirmation. The main gap is the lack of parameter clarification, but annotations and schema cover the rest of the operational context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has a single id parameter with no description, and the tool description does not mention id at all. With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate by indicating which identifier is needed, but it does not.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Permanently delete') and the resource ('storage path'). It explicitly notes that documents are not deleted, only lose this assignment, which distinguishes it from sibling delete_document and other delete_* tools.

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 instruction to 'Confirm with the user first' provides some usage guidance, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives or conditions that would make this tool inappropriate. The usage is mostly implied by the tool name and description.

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

Deploy Server