Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Yandex Webmaster MCP Server

Yandex Webmaster MCP Server

by weselow
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ywm_delete_original_text

Delete an original text from Yandex Webmaster using its text ID to remove unwanted or outdated content.

Instructions

Delete an original text

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": {
      "text_id": "<text_id>"
    },
    "name": "ywm_delete_original_text"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
host_idNoHost ID. Optional if YANDEX_WEBMASTER_HOST_URL is configured.
text_idYesText ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description only indicates a destructive action ('Delete') without elaborating on recovery options, required permissions, or side effects. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it falls short.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action. While it is appropriately short, it could be slightly expanded to include context without losing conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The description is incomplete for a deletion tool with no output schema. It does not mention success indicators, error conditions, or prerequisites (e.g., existence of the text). The sparse context leaves the agent underinformed.

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 100%, with both parameters (host_id and text_id) having descriptions in the input schema. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Delete' and the resource 'original text', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling deletion tools like ywm_delete_host or ywm_delete_sitemap, but the resource types are distinct enough that confusion is unlikely.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to delete versus update or archive original texts. The description provides no context for appropriate usage scenarios.

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