Skip to main content
Glama

fc_delete_post

Remove unwanted or outdated posts from your FluentCommunity platform by specifying the post ID. This tool helps maintain content quality and manage community discussions effectively.

Instructions

Delete a post from FluentCommunity

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
post_idYesThe ID of the post to delete

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the fc_delete_post tool that executes a DELETE request to the WordPress API endpoint to delete the specified post.
    fc_delete_post: async (args: any) => {
      try {
        const response = await makeWordPressRequest('DELETE', `fc-manager/v1/posts/${args.post_id}`);
        return { toolResult: { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(response, null, 2) }] } };
      } catch (error: any) {
        return { toolResult: { isError: true, content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Error: ${error.message}` }] } };
      }
    },
  • Zod input schema validation for the fc_delete_post tool, requiring a post_id.
    const deletePostSchema = z.object({
      post_id: z.number().describe('The ID of the post to delete')
    });
  • Tool registration entry in the fluentCommunityTools array defining name, description, and input schema for fc_delete_post.
    {
      name: 'fc_delete_post',
      description: 'Delete a FluentCommunity post',
      inputSchema: { type: 'object', properties: deletePostSchema.shape }
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool deletes a post, implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't cover critical aspects like whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., removing associated comments), or what happens on success/failure. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

The description is a single, direct sentence with zero wasted words—'Delete a post from FluentCommunity'—making it highly efficient and front-loaded. Every word earns its place by specifying the action, resource, and system.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a destructive mutation with no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral traits like permanence or permissions, usage guidelines versus siblings, or expected outcomes, leaving the agent with insufficient context for safe and effective invocation.

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 the single parameter 'post_id' fully documented in the schema as 'The ID of the post to delete'. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints, but the schema provides adequate baseline information, justifying a score of 3.

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 action ('Delete') and resource ('a post from FluentCommunity'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like fc_bulk_delete_posts or fc_delete_comment, which would require mentioning single vs bulk deletion or post vs comment deletion, but the verb+resource combination is specific enough for basic understanding.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fc_bulk_delete_posts (for multiple posts) or fc_delete_comment (for comments). It also doesn't mention prerequisites, such as needing the post_id or appropriate permissions, leaving the agent to infer usage from context alone.

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/wplaunchify/fluent-community-mcp'

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