Vobiz MCP Server

Official

by vobiz-ai

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Hybrid

Delete voice application

delete_application

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently deletes a Vobiz voice application and stops inbound call handling. Unlink linked phone numbers first to avoid conflicts; attached SIP endpoints remain and need a new application.

Instructions

Permanently delete a Vobiz voice application; this cannot be undone. Inbound calls on numbers still linked to it stop being handled, and Vobiz may refuse the delete (HTTP 409) while numbers are linked, so unlink them first with update_phone_number (unlink_application). SIP endpoints attached to it are kept, not deleted (cascade is off), and need a new application via update_sip_endpoint. To stop using an application without deleting it, re-point its numbers instead. An unknown app_id raises not_found. Gated by VOBIZ_ENABLE_PROVISIONING and confirm: true.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`app_id`	Yes	Numeric Vobiz application ID (5-25 digits): the app_id returned by list_applications or create_application.
`confirm`	Yes	Must be true, set only after the user explicitly approved: deleting this application. If your client supports MCP elicitation, the server asks the user to approve directly and this flag is not relied on; otherwise it is your attestation that the user approved.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	No	True on success. On a failure the result is isError with ok: false plus `error` (kind), `message`, `retryable` and sometimes `http_status`.
`app_id`	No	The application that was deleted.
`deleted`	No	True when the record was deleted by this call.
`http_status`	No	HTTP status Vobiz answered with.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.4.2Oct 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / app_id / description

Added value: +"Numeric Vobiz application ID (5-25 digits): the app_id returned by list_applications or create_application."

changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description

Previous value: -"Must be true, set only after the user explicitly approved: deleting this application."New value: +"Must be true, set only after the user explicitly approved: deleting this application. If your client supports MCP elicitation, the server asks the user to approve directly and this flag is not relied on; otherwise it is your attestation that the user approved."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "app_id": {
+      "description": "The application that was deleted.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "deleted": {
+      "const": true,
+      "description": "True when the record was deleted by this call.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "http_status": {
+      "description": "HTTP status Vobiz answered with.",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "True on success. On a failure the result is isError with ok: false plus `error` (kind), `message`, `retryable` and sometimes `http_status`.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv1.1.1Oct 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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 material context beyond them: irreversibility, the 409-on-linked-numbers failure mode, cascade being off so SIP endpoints survive but become orphaned, not_found for a bad app_id, and the VOBIZ_ENABLE_PROVISIONING + confirm gating. This is exactly the pre-flight information an agent needs before a destructive call.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the irreversible nature leads, then failure modes, then side effects, then the alternative, then gating. Every clause carries distinct operational information, though the run-on structure of the middle sentences packs several facts per clause and could be split for scanning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers what remains: prerequisites, error behavior, non-cascading effects, and environment/auth gating. Nothing an agent must know to call this destructively and correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and both params are already documented, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds value the schema does not: that an unknown app_id surfaces as not_found, and that confirm: true is enforced server-side and gated by VOBIZ_ENABLE_PROVISIONING. Minor edge-case detail (no id format example in prose) keeps it off a 5.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: "Permanently delete a Vobiz voice application; this cannot be undone." That cleanly separates it from update_application, get_application, and the other delete_* siblings in this account (delete_sip_endpoint, delete_sub_account, delete_recording), which are each named as distinct resources.

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 states the prerequisite (unlink numbers via update_phone_number first, else HTTP 409) and names the alternative path for the non-destructive case: "To stop using an application without deleting it, re-point its numbers instead." It also warns that attached SIP endpoints are not cascaded and require update_sip_endpoint, so the agent knows the follow-up call sequence.

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

Deploy Server