Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SiYuan MCP Server

SiYuan MCP Server

by xgq18237
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

remove_database_column

Destructive

Remove a column from a database attribute view in SiYuan Note. Specify the database block ID and column key ID; optionally remove related association targets.

Instructions

删除数据库字段

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": {
      "avID": "<avID>",
      "keyID": "<keyID>"
    },
    "name": "remove_database_column"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
avIDYes思源块、文档、笔记本或数据库 ID
keyIDYes思源块、文档、笔记本或数据库 ID
removeRelationDestNo同时删除关联目标

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the description's 'Delete' is consistent. However, it adds no extra behavioral disclosure (e.g., whether it cascades, requires permissions, or is reversible).

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?

Extremely concise single phrase, no wasted words. However, it may be considered too brief for non-Chinese speakers, but structure is efficient.

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?

For a destructive tool with no output schema, the description lacks context about effects, return values, or post-condition state. More explanation would improve completeness.

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% and parameter descriptions are provided. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema fields.

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 'Delete database field' clearly communicates the action (delete) and resource (database column/field). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_database_column' or 'rename_database'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'remove_database_rows'). No prerequisites or context provided.

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