Skip to main content
Glama
u9401066

pubmed-search-mcp

by u9401066
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

delete_pipeline

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently removes a saved pipeline configuration and its execution history by name, with related schedules cleaned up for default tenants.

Instructions

Permanently delete a saved pipeline configuration and execution history.

For the default tenant, any process-level schedule is removed only after the stored pipeline deletion succeeds. Isolated tenants never mutate the shared process scheduler.

Args: name: Name of the saved pipeline to delete.

Returns: Confirmation of deletion.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.7.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / maxLength
      Added value: +64
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / pattern
      Added value: +"^[a-z0-9](?:[a-z0-9_-]{0,63})$"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "delete_pipelineOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.5.16

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 and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: that execution history is destroyed (not just the config) and that process-level schedules are removed only after the deletion succeeds, with isolated tenants exempt from scheduler mutation. That is real side-effect disclosure the annotations cannot convey.

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?

Front-loads the destructive action in the first sentence, then adds the tenant/scheduler caveat, then Args/Returns. Efficient and well-organized, though the tenant-scheduler sentence is somewhat more detailed than most callers need.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the return ('Confirmation of deletion'), the scope of destruction, and the scheduler side effect. It is nearly complete for a single-parameter destructive tool; only name-discovery and irreversibility recovery guidance are missing.

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 0% and the description only restates the obvious ('name: Name of the saved pipeline to delete'). It does not explain the naming constraints already implied by the schema (lowercase, pattern, 64-char limit) or how to discover valid names, so it adds little beyond a bare restatement.

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 ('Permanently delete a saved pipeline configuration and execution history'), which is enough to separate it from save_pipeline, list_pipelines, and load_pipeline. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the very similar unschedule_pipeline sibling, which also touches scheduling, so sibling differentiation is only partial.

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?

Usage is only implied: the word 'Permanently' hints this is the irreversible removal path, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no pointer to unschedule_pipeline for the case where the user only wants to cancel scheduling. The agent must infer the boundary between delete and unschedule.

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