Skip to main content
Glama

project_delete_describe

Preview the effects of deleting an OmniFocus project without performing the deletion. Inspect planned changes, then use project_delete once approved.

Instructions

Preview what project_delete would do without making any changes. Do NOT use to actually delete a project — use project_delete instead. Returns { description, plannedChanges } describing the permanent deletion that would occur. No side effects: read-only by contract — never mutates OmniFocus. Example: dry-run companion — pass the same args you would to the write tool, inspect plannedChanges, then call the write tool once approved.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesPersistent ID of the project to delete. Get from project_list. Verify you have the correct ID before calling — this action is irreversible and deletes all contained tasks.
dry_runNoWhen true, validates input and returns a preview envelope with meta.dryRun = true; no adapter call is made and no mutation occurs.
idempotency_keyNoIdempotency key for retry-safe deletes. Identical subsequent calls within the TTL window replay the original envelope with meta.idempotentReplay = true instead of re-deleting (or re-raising NotFound on the second attempt).
expectedModifiedAtNoOptimistic-concurrency guard: ISO-8601 timestamp from a recent project_get. If the project's current modifiedAt differs, the call fails with OF_CONFLICT and no delete is performed. Omit to skip the check.
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, but description fully covers behavior: returns { description, plannedChanges }, no side effects, read-only by contract, never mutates OmniFocus. Clearly states it's a preview only.

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?

Description is concise with front-loaded purpose. Three sentences cover purpose, usage, behavior, and return value. Minor redundancy in 'No side effects' and 'read-only by contract' but overall efficient.

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?

Given no output schema, description adequately describes return structure ({ description, plannedChanges }). Covers no side effects, read-only nature, and relationship to write tool. Does not mention idempotency or optimistic concurrency, but these are in schema and not critical for usage understanding.

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% with all 4 parameters fully documented. Description adds little beyond the schema for parameters, only a brief usage hint about passing same args. Baseline 3 is appropriate as description doesn't significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states it previews what project_delete would do without changes, using specific verb 'Preview' and resource 'what project_delete would do'. Distinguishes from sibling tool project_delete by explicitly saying 'Do NOT use to actually delete a project — use project_delete instead'.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly tells when to use (dry-run companion) and when not to use (don't want to delete). Provides alternative: 'use project_delete instead'. Gives example workflow: pass same args, inspect plannedChanges, then call write tool.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/torsday/omnifocus-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server